Cargando…
Fuente: Caselaw Access Project, Harvard Law School Library Innovation Lab (static.case.law); Court of Appeal of the State of California; 25 Cal. App. 4th 1731. Datos: https://static.case.law/cal-app-4th/25/cases/1731-01.json. Opinión judicial de EE.UU. sin restricciones conocidas de uso: CAP levantó las restricciones el 2024-03-01 (prensa); el espejo HF free-law declara cc0-1.0; NO c… Abrir la fuente
Cargando el texto completo…
People v. Venegas, 25 Cal. App. 4th 1731 (Court of Appeal of the State of California, 1994) Opinion CHIN, J. Augustine Venegas (hereafter appellant) appeals after a jury conviction of possessing a weapon in state prison. (Pen. Code, former § 4502 [now § 4502, subd. (a)].) He claims that the trial court erred in denying his motion for change of venue and that he received ineffective assistance of counsel. In a consolidated petition for writ of habeas corpus, he challenges his sentence. The court imposed a full four-year upper term “consecutive to any and all other sentences [appellant] is now serving,” including a 1986 term appellant received for another offense he committed in prison. Appellant contends that, pursuant to section 1170.1, subdivisions (a) and (c) (hereafter sections 1170.1(a) and 1170.1(c) respectively), the court instead should have imposed a sentence of one-third of the middle term. We affirm the conviction, but grant the petition for a writ of habeas corpus and remand for resentencing. Facts On August 17, 1992, Pelican Bay Prison Correctional Officer Mike Armstrong was in a control booth, releasing prisoners for breakfast. Another officer yelled, and Armstrong heard a scuffle begin in the other officer’s area. Shortly afterward, Armstrong saw an inmate named Cost “backtailing across the rotunda.” Appellant was charging at Cost, forcing Cost back. Armstrong saw appellant make punching-type motions at Cost with both hands and then saw a large amount of blood…
Fuente: Caselaw Access Project, Harvard Law School Library Innovation Lab (static.case.law); Court of Appeal of the State of California; 25 Cal. App. 4th 1731. Datos: https://static.case.law/cal-app-4th/25/cases/1731-01.json. Opinión judicial de EE.UU. sin restricciones conocidas de uso: CAP levantó las restricciones el 2024-03-01 (prensa); el espejo HF free-law declara cc0-1.0; NO c… Abrir la fuente
Cargando el texto completo…
People v. Venegas, 25 Cal. App. 4th 1731 (Court of Appeal of the State of California, 1994) Opinion CHIN, J. Augustine Venegas (hereafter appellant) appeals after a jury conviction of possessing a weapon in state prison. (Pen. Code, former § 4502 [now § 4502, subd. (a)].) He claims that the trial court erred in denying his motion for change of venue and that he received ineffective assistance of counsel. In a consolidated petition for writ of habeas corpus, he challenges his sentence. The court imposed a full four-year upper term “consecutive to any and all other sentences [appellant] is now serving,” including a 1986 term appellant received for another offense he committed in prison. Appellant contends that, pursuant to section 1170.1, subdivisions (a) and (c) (hereafter sections 1170.1(a) and 1170.1(c) respectively), the court instead should have imposed a sentence of one-third of the middle term. We affirm the conviction, but grant the petition for a writ of habeas corpus and remand for resentencing. Facts On August 17, 1992, Pelican Bay Prison Correctional Officer Mike Armstrong was in a control booth, releasing prisoners for breakfast. Another officer yelled, and Armstrong heard a scuffle begin in the other officer’s area. Shortly afterward, Armstrong saw an inmate named Cost “backtailing across the rotunda.” Appellant was charging at Cost, forcing Cost back. Armstrong saw appellant make punching-type motions at Cost with both hands and then saw a large amount of blood…