Legal Opinion

People v. Bergen

California Court of Appeal

Decided August 22, 2008No. B203793PublishedCited by 10 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion

NEIDORF, J. *

Niall Patrick Bergen appeals from the judgment entered following his plea of no contest to manufacturing concentrated cannabis, known as “hash oil” or “honey oil,” by using butane to extract the resin containing the psychoactive ingredient tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) from marijuana plant material. (Health & Saf. Code, § 11379.6, subd. (a) (section 11379.6(a)).) Bergen contends he should have been charged under section 11358, which addresses processing resin from marijuana, instead of section 11379.6(a). We conclude that when, as here, the method used to extract the…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. In Re LynchCalifornia Supreme Court · 1972
  2. People Ex Rel. Lockyer v. Shamrock Foods Co.California Supreme Court · 2000
  3. Hess v. Ford Motor Co.California Supreme Court · 2002
  4. People v. JenkinsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1980
  5. People v. CoriaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1999

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

3Cited by10 opinions

  1. David v. Hernandez, California Court of Appeal, 5th District2017
  2. People v. Corrigan, California Court of Appeal, 5th District2019
  3. State v. BrownNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 2018
  4. Applied Medical Distribution Corp. v. JarrellsCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2024
  5. David v. HernandezCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2017

5 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