Legal Opinion

Wooten v. Superior Court

California Court of Appeal

Decided October 30, 2001No. E028089PublishedCited by 8 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion

WARD, J.

In the trial court, petitioners Brent Howard Wooten and Daniel Robert Mendoza (defendants) stand charged with pimping and pandering. According to the evidence at their preliminary hearing, they worked as managers at the Flesh Club. The Flesh Club appears to have been mainly a standard “strip joint.” However, it also offered semiprivate rooms in which, for $240, plus an optional gratuity, a customer could watch two naked women perform sexual acts on each other for approximately nine minutes.

Defendants seek review of the trial court’s refusal to set aside the information. They…

2Cases cited15 opinions

  1. Liparota v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1985
  2. Crandon v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1990
  3. People v. OverstreetCalifornia Supreme Court · 1986
  4. People ex rel. Lungren v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1996
  5. Pryor v. Municipal CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1979

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

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. Nunez v. HolderCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2010
  2. Nunez v. HolderCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2010
  3. Nunez v. HolderCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2010
  4. Osequeda-Nunez v. HolderCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2010
  5. Osequeda-Nunez v. HolderCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2010

3 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