People v. Palmer
California Supreme Court
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
CHIN, J.
We granted review to decide whether the so-called rule of consistency—that the acquittal of all alleged coconspirators but one requires acquittal of the remaining alleged conspirator—requires the reversal of a conspiracy conviction in this case, and whether similar principles require the reversal of a finding as to one but not both codefendants that an attempted murder was premeditated. We conclude that the rule of consistency is a vestige of the past with no continuing validity. Many reasons may explain apparently inconsistent verdicts: lenience, compromise, differing evidence…
2Cases cited37 opinions
- United States v. PowellSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
- Dunn v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1932
- United States v. DotterweichSupreme Court of the United States · 1943
- Standefer v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1980
- Harris v. RiveraSupreme Court of the United States · 1981
32 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by63 opinions
- People v. LewisCalifornia Supreme Court · 2001
- People v. ChunCalifornia Supreme Court · 2009
- People v. McCoyCalifornia Supreme Court · 2001
- People v. LawleyCalifornia Supreme Court · 2002
- People v. WilsonCalifornia Supreme Court · 2008
58 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.