People v. Mata
California Court of Appeal
[Opinion certified for partial publication.*]
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
BARRY-DEAL, J.
We hold that in a prosecution under former Health and Safety Code sections 11378.5 and 11379.5 1 for possession for sale and sale of phencyclidine (PCP) the People were not required to prove that the quantity or the substance itself had a potential for abuse associated with a depressant effect on the central nervous system. 2
I. Procedural History
An information filed February 1,1982, charged appellants Anaberta Betty Mata and Anita M. Mata 3 with sale of PCP on November 4, 1981. (§ 11379.5.) The information was amended on August 17, 1982, to charge Anaberta Mata with…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Bunnell v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1975
- Canales v. City of AlvisoCalifornia Supreme Court · 1970
- People v. AstonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1985
- Commonwealth v. TeadaSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1975
- People v. OliverMichigan Court of Appeals · 1979
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- People v. BarreraCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1999
- Casey William Hardison v. The State of WyomingWyoming Supreme Court · 2022
- People v. PolkCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2019
- People v. Polk, California Court of Appeal, 5th District2019
- People v. PolkCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2019
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.