What is the test for overturning a conviction for solicitation of murder?
California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from People v. Nelson, 192 Cal.Rptr.3d 760, 240 Cal.App.4th 488 (Cal. App. 2015):
Even more to the point, [i]n deciding the sufficiency of the evidence, a reviewing court resolves neither credibility issues nor evidentiary conflicts. [Citation.] Resolution of conflicts and inconsistencies in the testimony is the exclusive province of the trier of fact. [Citation.] (People v. Young (2005) 34 Cal.4th 1149, 1181, 24 Cal.Rptr.3d 112, 105 P.3d 487.)
[240 Cal.App.4th 499]
We therefore conclude that there was sufficient evidence to support defendant's conviction for solicitation of murder.3
[192 Cal.Rptr.3d 769]
Defendant's conviction for dissuading a witness (Count 4) is reversed. If the trial court had realized that it could not sentence defendant on this count, it might have made some of its other discretionary sentencing choices differently. (See generally People v. Burbine (2003) 106 Cal.App.4th 1250, 12561259, 131 Cal.Rptr.2d 628.) For example, it might have run Count 2 consecutively rather than concurrently. Accordingly, the entire sentence is reversed and the matter is remanded for resentencing.
We concur:
"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.
