Legal Opinion

People v. Palmer

California Supreme Court

Decided January 18, 2001No. S085029PublishedCited by 63 opinions

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

  1. United States v. PowellSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
  2. Dunn v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1932
  3. United States v. DotterweichSupreme Court of the United States · 1943
  4. Standefer v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1980
  5. Harris v. RiveraSupreme Court of the United States · 1981

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

3Cited by63 opinions

  1. People v. LewisCalifornia Supreme Court · 2001
  2. People v. ChunCalifornia Supreme Court · 2009
  3. People v. McCoyCalifornia Supreme Court · 2001
  4. People v. LawleyCalifornia Supreme Court · 2002
  5. People v. WilsonCalifornia Supreme Court · 2008

58 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