Legal Opinion

People v. Ruhl

California Court of Appeal

Decided May 16, 1985No. Crim. No. 13213PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion

SIMS, J.

In People v. Arbuckle (1978) 22 Cal.3d 749 [150 Cal.Rptr. 778, 587 P.2d 220, 3 A.L.R.4th 1171], our Supreme Court held, as a general *313principle, whenever a judge accepts a plea bargain and retains sentencing discretion under the agreement, an implied term of the bargain is that sentence will be imposed by that judge. (Pp. 756-757; see also In re Mark L. (1983) 34 Cal.3d 171, 177 [193 Cal.Rptr. 165, 666 P.2d 22].) In People v. Rosaia (1984) 157 Cal.App.3d 832 [203 Cal.Rptr. 856], the Fifth District Court of Appeal adopted a rule requiring that where a defendant has a right under…

2Cases cited18 opinions

  1. People v. PopeCalifornia Supreme Court · 1979
  2. People v. KaaneheCalifornia Supreme Court · 1977
  3. People v. BelmontesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1983
  4. People v. ArbuckleCalifornia Supreme Court · 1978
  5. People v. GuerraCalifornia Supreme Court · 1984

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

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. People v. RuhlCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1985

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

Powered by the Exa API