Does the trial court have to determine a defendant's dangerousness on a count-by-count basis?
California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from People v. Hellon, C075511 (Cal. App. 2016):
9. At oral argument, defendant raised a new issue: whether the trial court, in addition to being required to determine defendant's eligibility for resentencing on a count-by-count basis, must also determine defendant's dangerousness on a count-by-count basis. We need not consider that issue because defendant forfeited it by failing to raise it until oral argument. (People v. Duff (2014) 58 Cal.4th 527, 550, fn. 9.)
"The most advanced legal research software ever built."
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.
Other Questions
When a defendant makes a mid-trial motion to revoke his self represented status and have standby counsel appointed for the remainder of the trial, does the trial court have a duty to manage the trial? (California, United States of America)
What is the record of why defendant's trial counsel failed to object to the sentencing on the ground that the trial court improperly used defendant's religious beliefs as a basis for his sentence? (California, United States of America)
Is a defendant's claim that the trial court's failure to provide him with the means and subpoena witnesses to defend at trial a violation of his Sixth Amendment right to represent himself at trial reversible? (California, United States of America)
What are the findings of the Court of Appeal in determining whether a defendant received a fair trial due to a series of trial errors? (California, United States of America)
Whether a court's ruling is based on oral testimony or written declarations, when conflicting inferences can reasonably be drawn from the facts, can the appellate court defer to the trial court's factual determinations? (California, United States of America)
When a factual determination is challenged by an appellate court on the grounds that there is no substantial evidence to sustain it, can the appellate court substitute its deductions for those of the trial court? (California, United States of America)
What are the "magic words" required by the trial court to determine that a defendant is competent to stand trial? (California, United States of America)
Does Defendant have a claim that the trial court abused its discretion to treat Defendant as a "defendant" in a medical malpractice case? (California, United States of America)
What is the appellate court's role in determining whether a defendant satisfied his burden of producing clear and convincing evidence in the trial court? (California, United States of America)
When a factual determination is challenged by an appellate court on the grounds that there is no substantial evidence to sustain it, can the appellate court substitute its deductions for those of the trial court? (California, United States of America)
