People v. Crosby
California Court of Appeal
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
MERRILL, Acting P. J.
In this case we decide that in accepting a guilty plea to a felony the trial court is not required to advise the defendant that his conviction may result in an enhanced sentence for a future felony conviction.
Procedural Background
Appellant Courtney J. Crosby was charged by information with robbery (Pen. Code, 1 § 211). The information also alleged that Crosby had suffered two prior serious felony convictions within the meaning of section 667, rape (§ 261) and unlawful oral copulation (§ 288, subd. (a)). The prior convictions were the result of Crosby’s guilty pleas…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Bunnell v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1975
- In Re CarabesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1983
- Ganyo v. Municipal CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1978
- People v. HartyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1985
- Hartman v. Municipal CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1973
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by18 opinions
- People v. GuruleCalifornia Supreme Court · 2002
- In Re ResendizCalifornia Supreme Court · 2001
- People v. BernalCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1994
- People v. ArnoldCalifornia Supreme Court · 2004
- People v. BarellaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1999
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.