Legal Opinion

People v. Wims

California Supreme Court

Decided June 5, 1995No. S036641PublishedCited by 121 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion

WERDEGAR, J.

In this case we decide what standard a reviewing court must apply when deciding whether a trial judge’s failure to instruct the jury as to the factual elements necessary to support a sentence enhancement for use of a deadly and dangerous weapon, under Penal Code section 12022, subdivision (b),1 is prejudicial. Section 12022(b) imposes an additional term of one year upon “[a]ny person who personally uses a deadly or dangerous weapon in the commission or attempted commission of a felony.”2 We conclude that failure to instruct the jury as to all of the elements of section…

2Cases cited39 opinions

  1. Arizona v. FulminanteSupreme Court of the United States · 1991
  2. People v. WatsonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1956
  3. Sullivan v. LouisianaSupreme Court of the United States · 1993
  4. Patterson v. New YorkSupreme Court of the United States · 1977
  5. Rose v. ClarkSupreme Court of the United States · 1986

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

3Cited by121 opinions

  1. People v. BrevermanCalifornia Supreme Court · 1998
  2. People v. YoungCalifornia Supreme Court · 2005
  3. People v. FloodCalifornia Supreme Court · 1998
  4. People v. RielCalifornia Supreme Court · 2000
  5. People v. DennisCalifornia Supreme Court · 1998

116 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