What is the test for establishing that the language of a penal statute is reasonably susceptible to two constructions?
California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from People v. Womack, 167 Cal.App.2d 130, 334 P.2d 309, 72 A.L.R.2d 703 (Cal. App. 1959):
Defendant seeks to invoke the rule that where the language of a penal statute is reasonably susceptible of two constructions that construction which is more favorable to the accused will ordinarily be adopted. People v. Valentine, 28 Cal.2d 121, 169 P.2d 1.
"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
What is the test for establishing that language is sufficient to require the construction of a statutory definition for the purpose of establishing that a section of law does not need to include the words "constant construction" in its construction? (California, United States of America)
Does the rule of "lenity, '" apply in a penal statute that truly is susceptible of more than one reasonable construction in meaning or application? (California, United States of America)
When a section of the California Civil Code provides for construction of a statute, how do courts interpret the construction of the statute? (California, United States of America)
What is the test for evidence that the appellant could reasonably reasonably reasonably expect the appellant to have knowledge of a crime? (California, United States of America)
If a statutory language does not yield a plain meaning, and the legislative history of the legislation is not to be considered in determining the meaning of the statute, can a court rely on the statute itself? (California, United States of America)
What is the test for constructing a reasonable statute? (California, United States of America)
How have courts instructed on reasonable doubt in the language of section 1096 of the Penal Code? (California, United States of America)
What is the difference between a reasonable and unreasonable plaintiff and a reasonable plaintiff under a "reasonable implied assumption of risk" approach? (California, United States of America)
Is the language in elder abuse statutes the same as that in child abuse statutes? (California, United States of America)
When harmonizing two statutes relating to the same subject, can a particular or specific statute take precedence over a conflicting general statute? (California, United States of America)
