Legal Opinion

People v. Newman

California Supreme Court

Decided August 16, 1999No. S072560PublishedCited by 20 opinions

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

  1. Boykin v. AlabamaSupreme Court of the United States · 1969
  2. In Re TahlCalifornia Supreme Court · 1969
  3. People v. HowardCalifornia Supreme Court · 1992
  4. People v. LangCalifornia Supreme Court · 1989
  5. In Re YurkoCalifornia Supreme Court · 1974

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

3Cited by20 opinions

  1. People v. CunninghamCalifornia Supreme Court · 2001
  2. People v. LopezCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2005
  3. People v. CrossCalifornia Supreme Court · 2015
  4. People v. FriersonCalifornia Supreme Court · 2017
  5. People v. DixonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2007

15 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