Legal Opinion

People v. Smith

California Court of Appeal

Decided November 12, 1997No. A074746PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion

LAMBDEN, J.

We hold in this case charged under the “Three Strikes” law (Pen. Code, § 1170.12; unspecified section references are to that code) that the defendant is entitled to a remand under People v. Superior Court (Romero) (1996) 13 Cal.4th 497 [53 Cal.Rptr.2d 789, 917 P.2d 628] (Romero), where the record of his pre-Romero motion to strike shows the court felt it had no discretion and where the motion appears to have been consistent with his previously negotiated plea.

A second amended complaint charged Wayne Smith with three counts of selling (Health & Saf. Code, § 11352, subd. (a))…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. People v. Superior Court (Romero)California Supreme Court · 1996
  2. People v. MarsdenCalifornia Supreme Court · 1970
  3. People v. HarveyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1979
  4. People v. FuhrmanCalifornia Supreme Court · 1997
  5. Superior Court v. County of MendocinoCalifornia Supreme Court · 1996

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

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. People v. KonowCalifornia Supreme Court · 2004
  2. People v. Fox, California Court of Appeal, 5th District2019
  3. People v. FoxCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2019
  4. People v. SmithCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1997

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API