People v. Goolsby
California Supreme Court
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
CHIN, J.
A jury convicted defendant, Richard James Goolsby, of violating Penal Code section 451, subdivision (b), which proscribes arson of “an inhabited structure or inhabited property.” Because of the way the case was charged, the Court of Appeal found the evidence insufficient to sustain the conviction, which precludes retrial of that charge. The question before us is whether defendant can be retried for the lesser related offense of arson of property under section 451, subdivision (d), without violating section 654, as interpreted in Kellett v. Superior Court (1966) 63 Cal.2d 822…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Kellett v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1966
- People v. GuiuanCalifornia Supreme Court · 1998
- People v. ToroCalifornia Supreme Court · 1989
- People v. HatchCalifornia Supreme Court · 2000
- People v. WittCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1975
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by19 opinions
- People v. Dinh Van Nguyen, California Court of Appeal, 5th District2017
- People v. HamernikCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2016
- People v. Linville, California Court of Appeal, 5th District2018
- People v. TrevinoCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2016
- People v. GoolsbyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2016
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.