Legal Opinion

People v. Mullins

California Court of Appeal, 5th District

Decided January 17, 2018No. C079295PublishedCited by 19 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

NICHOLSON, J.*

*598Defendants Karre Mullins and Arturo Russell were convicted by jury of robbery involving bank customers at ATM's. Defendant Mullins was also convicted on a count of conspiracy to commit petty theft. Sentenced to determinate terms, defendants appeal. On appeal, they argue: (1) the evidence was insufficient to support robbery convictions, (2) the existence of an identity theft statute precluded convictions for robbery because the identity theft statute is more specific, and (3) the trial court improperly used argumentative language to instruct the jury on robbery. Additionally,…

2Cases cited31 opinions

  1. People v. WatsonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1956
  2. People v. BolinCalifornia Supreme Court · 1998
  3. People v. KraftCalifornia Supreme Court · 2000
  4. People v. MitchellCalifornia Supreme Court · 2001
  5. People v. WhartonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1991

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

3Cited by19 opinions

  1. People v. Montalvo, California Court of Appeal, 5th District2019
  2. People v. Martin, California Court of Appeal, 5th District2018
  3. People v. Medina, California Court of Appeal, 5th District2018
  4. In re Jeremiah S.California Court of Appeal · 2019
  5. People v. BradenCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2021

14 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