California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from Pedro T., In re, 14 Cal.App.4th 453, 17 Cal.Rptr.2d 564 (Cal. App. 1993):
7 We note here that appellant expressly disclaims any reliance upon constitutional due process considerations. We further note in this context that although the notice of intention to aggregate, contained in the subsequent petition, is at best ambiguous with respect to any purported intent to seek a change in any previous computation of confinement time, the probation officer's report listed the maximum confinement time figured by running all terms consecutively, thus providing some notice of the possible action. No objection was made at the hearing to the recomputation, and any objection to notice may therefore be deemed waived. (See People v. Melton (1990) 218 Cal.App.3d 1406, 1409, 267 Cal.Rptr. 640, holding that any error in imposing a restitution fine to which defendant, on a plea bargain, had not expressly agreed, was waived where the probation report recommended that a fine be imposed and defendant failed to object at the hearing.)
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexsei.com.