Legal Opinion

People v. Moreland

California Court of Appeal

Decided May 17, 1978No. Crim. 3099PublishedCited by 22 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion

TUTTLE, J.* —

On December 28, 1976, defendant was charged in an information with a violation of section 246 of the Penal Code.1 At that time section 246 read in pertinent part: “Any person who shall maliciously and wilfully discharge a firearm at an inhabited dwelling house or occupied building, is guilty of a felony, ...” (Stats. 1949, ch. 698, § 1, p. 1200.)2

The question presented in this appeal is of fundamental significance: In determining whether defendant was properly charged with a violation of section 246, should the words “inhabited dwelling house or *15occupied building” as used…

2Cases cited20 opinions

  1. United States v. WiltbergerSupreme Court of the United States · 1820
  2. McBoyle v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1931
  3. Keeler v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1970
  4. People v. ValentineCalifornia Supreme Court · 1946
  5. People v. RalphCalifornia Supreme Court · 1944

15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by22 opinions

  1. People v. CruzCalifornia Supreme Court · 1996
  2. DENO CONSTANTINE KANARAS v. StateCourt of Special Appeals of Maryland · 1983
  3. People v. SimonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1986
  4. People v. StepneyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1981
  5. Louisiana-Pacific Corp. v. Humboldt Bay Municipal Water DistrictCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1982

17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API