How has the Court considered whether appellant was armed when he was convicted in count four of the methamphetamine possession charge?
California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from People v. Mazza, A143933 (Cal. App. 2018):
5. We note that neither party has raised the issue whether appellant was armed when he possessed the methamphetamine for which he was convicted in count four. (See People v. Bland (1995) 10 Cal.4th 991, 997-1004.) Appellant is entitled to separate consideration of his eligibility for relief under Proposition 36 for each individual conviction. (People v. Johnson (2015) 61 Cal.4th 674, 690-691.)
"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
In what circumstances will a court change the charge of simple possession of marijuana to the charged offense of possession of possession for sale? (California, United States of America)
In what circumstances will the jury consider whether or not to convict appellant of a charge of possessing materials with intent to pervert the course of justice? (California, United States of America)
What factors will the court consider in deciding whether to join the murder charge with the domestic violence charge as a separate set of charges under section 954 of the California Criminal Code? (California, United States of America)
What factors will the court consider in determining whether or not to convict appellant of a charge of assault based on uncharged conduct? (California, United States of America)
If a defendant is convicted of a lesser charge of a greater charge of sexual assault, is the lesser charge necessarily included in the greater charge? (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)
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)
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)
Can the jury consider the importance of the age factor in determining whether or not the evidence should be considered "triple count" or "double count"? (California, United States of America)
Does a jury need to convict a defendant of a lesser charge before the charge requiring acquittal of the greater charge is considered? (California, United States of America)
