Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

People v. Weddington

California Court of Appeal

Decided April 13, 2016No. B256361Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in part

ROTHSCHILD, P. J., Concurring and Dissenting. —

I concur in parts II, III, and V of the majority’s discussion, I concur in part and respectfully dissent in part to part I, and I respectfully dissent from part IV.

I. Attempted Burglary

A jury convicted defendants of burglary of a house on Labrador Street and attempted burglary of houses on Gothic Avenue, Gerald Avenue, and Tupper *493Street. The majority affirms all of the convictions. I, however, believe that the evidence is insufficient to support the jury’s verdicts that defendants are guilty of the three attempted burglaries. I would therefore…

2Cases cited15 opinions

  1. People v. PrinceCalifornia Supreme Court · 2007
  2. People v. MillerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1935
  3. People v. MurrayCalifornia Supreme Court · 1859
  4. People v. VizcarraCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1980
  5. Magness v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 2012

10 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