About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline
LOG IN
LOG IN

16 Gonz. L. Rev. 239 (1980-1981)
Criminal Law - Probation - Where a Sentence is Deferred and the Defendant is Placed on Probation, the Trial Court Loses Authority to Revoke Probation and Impose Sentence upon Expiration of the Probationary Period

handle is hein.journals/gonlr16 and id is 259 raw text is: CRIMINAL LAW PROBATION WHERE A SENTENCE IS DEFERRED AND THE DEFENDANT IS PLACED ON PROBATION, THE TRIAL COURT LOSES AUTHORITY TO REVOKE PROBA- TION AND IMPOSE SENTENCE UPON EXPIRATION OF THE PROBATIONARY PERIOD. State v. Nelson, 92 Wn. 2d 862, 601 P.2d 1276 (1979). In State v. Nelson the Washington Supreme Court held that when a trial court grants a deferred sentence' and places a defen- dant on probation, the court's authority to revoke or modify pro- bation terminates upon the expiration of the probationary period. The court determined that RCW 9.95.230 of the Washington Pro- bation Act,2 which authorizes a trial court to revoke a suspended sentence or terminate probation, controls the length of time a trial court retains authority to revoke probation. In so doing, the court overruled prior Washington decisions3 which had read RCW 9.95.230 in conjunction with RCW 9.95.240' to allow a court to 1. For the purposes of this Note the term deferred sentence refers to the situation where the trial judge suspends the actual imposition of sentence pursuant to WASH. Rv. CODE § 9.95.210 (1979). The term suspended sentence refers to the situation where the trial judge imposes a sentence and then suspends its execution. Id. 2. Id. § 9.95.200-.250 (1979). These statutes were first referred to collectively as the Washington Probation Act in State v. Davis, 56 Wn. 2d 729, 355 P.2d 344 (1960). The Pro- bation Act should not be confused with the Washington Suspended Sentence Act, WASH. Rxv. CODE § 9.92.060-.064 (1979). Although the two pertain to the same subject matter, this Note deals exclusively with the Washington Probation Act. A detailed comparison of the two Acts is provided in State v. Davis, 56 Wn. 2d 729, 355 P.2d 344 (1960). 3. In re Jaime v. Rhay, 59 Wn. 2d 58, 365 P.2d 772 (1961); In re Myers, 20 Wn. App. 200, 579 P.2d 1006 (1978). 4. WAH. Ray. CODE § 9.95.230 (1979) provides: The court shall have authority at any time during the course of probation to (1) revoke, modify, or change its order of suspension of imposition or execution of sentence; (2) it may at any time, when the ends of justice will be subserved thereby, and when the reformation of the probationer shall warrant it, terminate the period of probation, and discharge the person so held. 5. Id. § 9.95.240 provides in part- Every defendant who has fulfilled the condition of his probation for the entire period thereof, or who shall have been discharged from probation prior to the termination of the period thereof, may at any time prior to the expiration of the maximum period of punishment for the offense for which he has been convicted 239

What Is HeinOnline?

HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.



Short-term subscription options include 24 hours, 48 hours, or 1 week to HeinOnline.

Purchase Access

Contact us for annual subscription options:

Contact Us

Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?

Log In

profiles profiles most