22 Cited authorities

People v. Osband
13 Cal.4th 622 (Cal. 1996) Cited 2,628 times 2 Legal Analyses
Holding error was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt because defendant received more than he was entitled to when the jury was instructed on the "specific intent" to commit the underlying felony of rape
People v. Harrison
48 Cal.3d 321 (Cal. 1989) Cited 1,343 times
Upholding separate punishments for three acts of sexual penetration over the course of less than 10 minutes where "each of defendant's 'repenetrations' was clearly volitional, criminal and occasioned by a separate act of force."
People v. Rodriguez
47 Cal.4th 501 (Cal. 2009) Cited 414 times
Holding that California law precluded a redundant sentencing 10-year firearm use enhancement pursuant to Cal. Penal Code 12022.5, and Cal. Penal Code 186.22 (b)(C) a 10-year enhancement for use of a firearm to benefit a criminal street gang qualifying as a violent felony
People v. Ferraez
112 Cal.App.4th 925 (Cal. Ct. App. 2003) Cited 472 times
Finding substantial evidence supported gang enhancement when expert opinion was couple with other testimony from which jury reasonably could infer crime was gang related
People v. Perez
23 Cal.3d 545 (Cal. 1979) Cited 996 times
Finding "assertion of a desire for wealth as the sole intent and objective in committing a series of separate thefts" is overbroad and violates statute's purpose
Neal v. State of California
55 Cal.2d 11 (Cal. 1960) Cited 1,594 times
Holding that defendant who threw gasoline into a bedroom and ignited it could not be punished for both attempted murder and arson because the arson was the means used to commit the crime of attempted murder
People v. Beamon
8 Cal.3d 625 (Cal. 1973) Cited 972 times
Holding under section 654 that " ‘execution of sentence for Count 1 [must] be stayed pending the finality of this judgment and service of sentence as to Count 2, such stay is to become permanent when service of sentence as to Count 2 is completed’ "
People v. Vu
143 Cal.App.4th 1009 (Cal. Ct. App. 2006) Cited 317 times
Recognizing a defendant charged with street terrorism and other crimes can simultaneously harbor multiple and independent objectives
People v. Herrera
70 Cal.App.4th 1456 (Cal. Ct. App. 1999) Cited 394 times
In People v. Herrera (1999) 70 Cal.App.4th 1456, the defendant personally used a firearm in a gang-related drive-by shooting and was convicted of (among other things) two counts of attempted murder and one count of street terrorism.
People v. Liu
46 Cal.App.4th 1119 (Cal. Ct. App. 1996) Cited 423 times
In People v. Liu (1996) 46 Cal.App.4th 1119, 1135-1136, the court found section 654 applied to bar punishment for the crime of possession of a silencer where the defendant purchased the silencer as part of a conspiracy to kidnap and murder the victims, and was the overt act necessary for the conspiracy.
Rule 8.500 - Petition for review
Cal. R. 8.500 Cited 337 times
(a)Right to file a petition, answer, or reply (1) A party may file a petition in the Supreme Court for review of any decision of the Court of Appeal, including any interlocutory order, except the denial of a transfer of a case within the appellate jurisdiction of the superior court. (2) A party may file an answer responding to the issues raised in the petition. In the answer, the party may ask the court to address additional issues if it grants review. (3) The petitioner may file a reply to the answer

PEOPLE v. MESA

22 Cited authorities

Holding error was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt because defendant received more than he was entitled to when the jury was instructed on the "specific intent" to commit the underlying felony of rape

Upholding separate punishments for three acts of sexual penetration over the course of less than 10 minutes where "each of defendant's 'repenetrations' was clearly volitional, criminal and occasioned by a separate act of force."

Holding that California law precluded a redundant sentencing 10-year firearm use enhancement pursuant to Cal. Penal Code 12022.5, and Cal. Penal Code 186.22 (b)(C) a 10-year enhancement for use of a firearm to benefit a criminal street gang qualifying as a violent felony

Finding substantial evidence supported gang enhancement when expert opinion was couple with other testimony from which jury reasonably could infer crime was gang related

Finding "assertion of a desire for wealth as the sole intent and objective in committing a series of separate thefts" is overbroad and violates statute's purpose

Holding that defendant who threw gasoline into a bedroom and ignited it could not be punished for both attempted murder and arson because the arson was the means used to commit the crime of attempted murder

Holding under section 654 that " ‘execution of sentence for Count 1 [must] be stayed pending the finality of this judgment and service of sentence as to Count 2, such stay is to become permanent when service of sentence as to Count 2 is completed’ "

Recognizing a defendant charged with street terrorism and other crimes can simultaneously harbor multiple and independent objectives

In People v. Herrera (1999) 70 Cal.App.4th 1456, the defendant personally used a firearm in a gang-related drive-by shooting and was convicted of (among other things) two counts of attempted murder and one count of street terrorism.