§Why CasetextPricing

PEOPLE v. MORALES

Respondent’s Reply Brief on the Merits

7 Cited authorities

  1. 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

  2. People v. Palacios

    41 Cal.4th 720 (Cal. 2007)   Cited 234 times
    In People v. Palacios (2007) 41 Cal.4th 720, the court cited Hutchins with approval, noted that the Legislature mandated that section 12022.53 enhancements "shall be imposed '[n]otwithstanding any other provision of law,'" and held that "in enacting section 12022.53, the Legislature made clear that it intended to create a sentencing scheme unfettered by section 654."

  3. People v. Alanis

    158 Cal.App.4th 1467 (Cal. Ct. App. 2008)   Cited 89 times
    Stating that proper procedure where party appeals from judgment where trial court lacked jurisdiction to enter judgment is to "reverse the void judgment rather than dismiss the appeal"

  4. People v. Espinoza

    226 Cal.App.4th 635 (Cal. Ct. App. 2014)   Cited 60 times
    In Espinoza, supra, 226 Cal.App.4th 635, a Proposition 36 resentencing case, the Court of Appeal held that excess custody credits do not reduce the PRCS supervision period.

  5. People v. Mendez

    234 Cal.App.3d 1773 (Cal. Ct. App. 1991)   Cited 59 times
    Concluding that the Attorney General was not estopped from challenging the action of a court that, years after a felony robber conviction became final, substituted a misdemeanor conviction for the felony, and sealed the records.

  6. In re Chaudhary

    172 Cal.App.4th 32 (Cal. Ct. App. 2009)   Cited 28 times
    Holding that time wrongfully imprisoned after erroneous parole denial cannot be credited towards the five-year parole discharge eligibility requirement

  7. Rule 2.251 - Electronic service

    Cal. R. 2.251   Cited 15 times

    (a)Authorization for electronic service When a document may be served by mail, express mail, overnight delivery, or fax transmission, the document may be served electronically under Code of Civil Procedure section 1010.6, Penal Code section 690.5, and the rules in this chapter. For purposes of electronic service made pursuant to Penal Code section 690.5, express consent to electronic service is required.[]= (Subd (a) amended effective January 1, 2022; previously amended effective January 1, 2007