People v. Belloso
Annotate this Case
Defendant appealed from the trial court's judgment entered after a jury convicted him of carrying a concealed dirk or dagger. Defendant argued that the evidence was insufficient to support his conviction, and that the trial court violated his rights to due process and equal protection under the Fourteenth Amendment by failing to consider his ability to pay before imposing court assessments and restitution fines, relying on the Court of Appeal's opinion in People v. Dueñas (2019) 30 Cal.App.5th 1157.
The court held that substantial evidence supported the jury's finding that the knife was a dirk or dagger. Noting the split in authority as to whether Dueñas was correct, the court upheld Dueñas and held that defendant was entitled to have a hearing on his ability to pay the assessments and fines. Accordingly, the court remanded the case for the trial court to conduct an ability-to-pay hearing in accordance with Dueñas. On remand, defendant was entitled to an opportunity to challenge the imposition of the assessment and fines.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.