§Why CasetextPricing

PEOPLE v. WHITE

Appellant’s Answer Brief on the Merits

80 Cited authorities

  1. People v. Carmony

    33 Cal.4th 367 (Cal. 2004)   Cited 3,242 times
    Holding that the Court of Appeal erred in reversing a trial court's ruling denying a request to strike prior convictions because the appellate court "simply disagreed with the [trial] court's weighing of [the relevant] factors"

  2. People v. Scott

    9 Cal.4th 331 (Cal. 1994)   Cited 3,906 times
    Holding that "complaints about the manner in which the trial court exercises its sentencing discretion and articulates its supporting reasons cannot be raised for the first time on appeal"

  3. People v. Maury

    30 Cal.4th 342 (Cal. 2003)   Cited 2,551 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the defendant must renew a motion for a change of venue after voir dire to preserve the issue for appeal

  4. Bouie v. City of Columbia

    378 U.S. 347 (1964)   Cited 1,496 times   11 Legal Analyses
    Holding that extending South Carolina's trespassing statute to remaining on another's property after being asked to leave was inconsistent with the law's text barring only "entry" upon another's property

  5. People v. Reed

    38 Cal.4th 1224 (Cal. 2006)   Cited 919 times
    Holding that only the elements test, and not the accusative pleading test, is appropriate for determining what qualifies as a lesser included offense

  6. 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

  7. People v. Harrison

    48 Cal.3d 321 (Cal. 1989)   Cited 1,344 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."

  8. People v. Rodriguez

    55 Cal.4th 1125 (Cal. 2012)   Cited 519 times
    Discussing CPC § 186.22

  9. People v. Blakeley

    23 Cal.4th 82 (Cal. 2000)   Cited 745 times
    Finding that under circumstances in which defendant testified "the gun just went off," jury could have properly found "the death was the result of the failure to exercise proper care under the circumstances" and thus supported conviction for involuntary manslaughter

  10. Renee J. v. Superior Court (Orange County Social Services Agency)

    26 Cal.4th 735 (Cal. 2001)   Cited 673 times
    Noting the Legislature's provision of six months of reunification services when the child is under age three at the time of removal from the physical custody of the parent

  11. Rule 4.414 - Criteria affecting probation

    Cal. R. 4.414   Cited 525 times

    Criteria affecting the decision to grant or deny probation include facts relating to the crime and facts relating to the defendant. (a) Facts relating to the crime Facts relating to the crime include: (1) The nature, seriousness, and circumstances of the crime as compared to other instances of the same crime; (2) Whether the defendant was armed with or used a weapon; (3) The vulnerability of the victim; (4) Whether the defendant inflicted physical or emotional injury; (5) The degree of monetary loss

  12. Rule 4.408 - Listing of factors not exclusive; sequence not significant

    Cal. R. 4.408   Cited 217 times

    (a) The listing of factors in these rules for making discretionary sentencing decisions is not exhaustive and does not prohibit a trial judge from using additional criteria reasonably related to the decision being made. Any such additional criteria must be stated on the record by the sentencing judge. (Subd (a) amended effective January 1, 2018; previously amended effective January 1, 2007.) (b) The order in which criteria are listed does not indicate their relative weight or importance. Cal. R.

  13. Rule 4.410 - General objectives in sentencing

    Cal. R. 4.410   Cited 205 times

    (a)General objectives of sentencing include: (1) Protecting society; (2) Punishing the defendant; (3) Encouraging the defendant to lead a law-abiding life in the future and deterring him or her from future offenses; (4) Deterring others from criminal conduct by demonstrating its consequences; (5) Preventing the defendant from committing new crimes by isolating him or her for the period of incarceration; (6) Securing restitution for the victims of crime; (7) Achieving uniformity in sentencing; and