Nine Years Probation is Not Illegal

Utah v. Francisco Candedo 2010 UT 32, (Utah Supreme Court, May 14, 2010).

Candedo plead guilty to three felony counts of participation in a fraudulent investment scheme.  He was sentenced to prison and jail.  Both incarceration sentences were suspended and he was sentenced to nine years of probation.  Candedo appealed the nine year probation sentence as illegal and requested relief under the exceptional circumstances doctrine.  The Court of Appeals did not reach the merits of his claim because they found that the punishment was not manifestly illegal.  Candedo appealed to the Supreme Court. 

The Supreme Court found that when a constitutional challenge to a sentence is raised, a court must first assess the constitutional claims before analyzing the punishment.  In this case, the challenge to the sentence fails because statute places no limits on probation and the purposes of probation are more than just for rehabilitation.  Finally, the probation was for nine years.  If sentenced to the full extent, Candedo’s prison sentence would have exceeded 15 years, for that reason the punishment is not wholly disproportionate to the crime. Affirmed after review.

Full Decision available at  http://www.utcourts.gov/opinions/supopin/Candedo051410.pdf