§Why CasetextPricing

PEOPLE v. INFANTE

Respondent’s Opening Brief on the Merits

12 Cited authorities

  1. People v. Correa

    54 Cal.4th 331 (Cal. 2012)   Cited 716 times
    Holding that section 654 does not bar multiple punishment for multiple violations of the same criminal statute and disapproving contrary dictum in Neal v. State of California

  2. People v. Deloza

    18 Cal.4th 585 (Cal. 1998)   Cited 1,069 times
    Finding trial court expressly declined to strike a prior felony conviction, but misunderstood scope of its discretion to impose concurrent sentences

  3. People v. Cromer

    24 Cal.4th 889 (Cal. 2001)   Cited 749 times
    Holding that independent review standard applied to trial court's conclusion that prosecution used due diligence to locate missing witness “comports with this court's usual practice for review of mixed question determinations affecting constitutional rights”

  4. People v. Jones

    54 Cal.4th 350 (Cal. 2012)   Cited 475 times
    Holding that section 654 prohibits multiple punishments for possession of a single firearm.

  5. 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

  6. People v. Lamas

    42 Cal.4th 516 (Cal. 2007)   Cited 265 times
    In People v. Lamas (2007) 42 Cal.4th 516, 519, 67 Cal.Rptr.3d 179, 169 P.3d 102 (Lamas), we "again consider[ed] the interplay between sections 186.22(a) and 12031(a)(2)(C)," this time specifying the sequence in which those provisions were to be applied.

  7. People v. Briceno

    34 Cal.4th 451 (Cal. 2004)   Cited 282 times
    Concluding section 1192.7, subdivision (c)'s reference to a felony “violation” of section 186.22 encompassed sentence enhancements under section 186.22, subdivision (b), and not just the felony “offense” of section 186.22

  8. People v. Robles

    23 Cal.4th 1106 (Cal. 2000)   Cited 168 times
    Analyzing § 12031, renumbered as § 25850

  9. In re Hayes

    70 Cal.2d 604 (Cal. 1969)   Cited 129 times
    Driving with suspended license and while intoxicated could be punished twice

  10. People v. Harrison

    1 Cal.App.3d 115 (Cal. Ct. App. 1969)   Cited 53 times
    In People v. Harrison(1969) 1 Cal.App.3d 115, 81 Cal.Rptr. 396 (Harrison), the court considered whether, under section 654, an individual could be punished both for violating a statute that prohibited ex-felons from "possessing" a firearm and for simultaneously violating a statute that prohibited "carrying" a loaded firearm in a vehicle or on a public street.

  11. Rule 8.516 - Issues on review

    Cal. R. 8.516   Cited 119 times

    (a)Issues to be briefed and argued (1) On or after ordering review, the Supreme Court may specify the issues to be briefed and argued. Unless the court orders otherwise, the parties must limit their briefs and arguments to those issues and any issues fairly included in them. (2) Notwithstanding an order specifying issues under (1), the court may, on reasonable notice, order oral argument on fewer or additional issues or on the entire cause. (b)Issues to be decided (1) The Supreme Court may decide