§Why CasetextPricing

MAGNESS v. S.C. (PEOPLE)

Real Party in Interest, The People, Petition for Review

18 Cited authorities

  1. People v. Mendoza

    23 Cal.4th 896 (Cal. 2000)   Cited 455 times
    In People v. Mendoza (2000) 23 Cal.4th 896, 98 Cal.Rptr.2d 431, 4 P.3d 265 (Mendoza), a jury convicted the defendants of murder without specifying the degree but also found true the special circumstance that it was committed during a robbery.

  2. People v. Laiwa

    34 Cal.3d 711 (Cal. 1983)   Cited 260 times
    Finding search of individual's tote bag following arrest unconstitutional

  3. People v. Walker

    29 Cal.4th 577 (Cal. 2002)   Cited 121 times
    In People v. Walker (2002) 29 Cal.4th 577, 128 Cal.Rptr.2d 75, 59 P.3d 150 (Walker), a majority of this court concluded that a failure to appear on a felony charge under section 1320.5 can also be the basis of a section 12022.1 enhancement for committing a new felony offense while released from custody for the original felony offense.

  4. People v. Valencia

    28 Cal.4th 1 (Cal. 2002)   Cited 103 times
    Holding that a trial court's instructions must resolve a legal issue for the jury, and may not invite the jury to resolve the question for itself

  5. People v. Gauze

    15 Cal.3d 709 (Cal. 1975)   Cited 216 times
    Holding that defendant could not be guilty of burglarizing his own home

  6. People v. Davis

    18 Cal.4th 712 (Cal. 1998)   Cited 83 times
    Holding that passing a forged check through the window chute of a business's walk-up window did not constitute a burglarious entry, because doing so did not violate the owner's possessory interest in the building

  7. People v. Failla

    64 Cal.2d 560 (Cal. 1966)   Cited 166 times
    Holding that instruction in language of statute, "one who enters an apartment with intent to commit theft or any felony is guilty of burglary" was prejudicially erroneous in failing to advise jury which acts the defendant upon entry may have intended to commit would amount to felonies

  8. People v. Salemme

    2 Cal.App.4th 775 (Cal. Ct. App. 1992)   Cited 76 times
    Concluding defendant violated § 459 despite homeowner's consent to entry because homeowner had no knowledge of defendant's felonious intent

  9. People v. Elsey

    81 Cal.App.4th 948 (Cal. Ct. App. 2000)   Cited 56 times
    Noting that “family members living in the same house” are unlikely to have “different expectations” of “protection against unauthorized entry” for “each interior room”

  10. People v. Wise

    25 Cal.App.4th 339 (Cal. Ct. App. 1994)   Cited 52 times
    Holding to the same effect as to penetration of iron mesh on a gate to a house

  11. 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