People v. Newman
California Supreme Court
1Opinion of the Court
*415Opinion
GEORGE, C. J.
This case presents the question whether, in a prosecution for possession of a firearm by a felon (Pen. Code, § 12021, subd. (a)(1)), a defendant must be advised of and waive certain rights set forth in Boykin v. Alabama (1969) 395 U.S. 238 [89 S.Ct. 1709, 23 L.Ed.2d 274], In re Tahl (1969) 1 Cal.3d 122 [81 Cal.Rptr. 577, 460 P.2d 449], and In re Yurko (1974) 10 Cal.3d 857 [112 Cal.Rptr. 513, 519 P.2d 561] (hereafter frequently referred to as Boykin-Tahl advisements) prior to stipulating to his or her status as a felon.1 The issue has spawned conflicting pronouncements from…
2Cases cited19 opinions
- Boykin v. AlabamaSupreme Court of the United States · 1969
- In Re TahlCalifornia Supreme Court · 1969
- People v. HowardCalifornia Supreme Court · 1992
- People v. LangCalifornia Supreme Court · 1989
- In Re YurkoCalifornia Supreme Court · 1974
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by20 opinions
- People v. CunninghamCalifornia Supreme Court · 2001
- People v. LopezCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2005
- People v. CrossCalifornia Supreme Court · 2015
- People v. FriersonCalifornia Supreme Court · 2017
- People v. DixonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2007
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.