California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from People v. Perez, B247105 (Cal. App. 2014):
7. Defendant also asserts that the impersonating an officer conviction is not supported by substantial evidence. But he offers no coherent argument or legal authority. Accordingly, we deem the contention waived. (Kaufman v. Goldman (2011) 195 Cal.App.4th 734, 743 ["Every argument presented by an appellant must be supported by both coherent argument and pertinent legal authority. [Citation.] If either is not provided, the appellate court may treat the issue as waived."].)
8. Defendant also asserts a new trial should have been granted on the impersonating an officer charge. Because he does not support the contention with argument or authority, we deem it waived. (Kaufman v. Goldman, supra, 195 Cal.App.4th at p. 743.)
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.