Legal Opinion

People v. Lopez

California Court of Appeal

Decided December 7, 2016No. 2d Crim. B267494PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtTangeman, J.

*496 Health and Safety Code section 11379 1 prohibits transportation of a controlled substance. A violation of this section requires proof that the transportation was for sale.

Here the trial court erred when it instructed the jury with an earlier version of section 11379 that did not require proof the transportation was for sale. But the error was harmless because the jury found that appellant possessed the same controlled substance for sale in his car after police stopped him for a traffic violation.

*497 Jeffrey Lopez appeals judgment after conviction by jury of possession and transportation of a…

2Cases cited15 opinions

  1. Apprendi v. New JerseySupreme Court of the United States · 2000
  2. Sullivan v. LouisianaSupreme Court of the United States · 1993
  3. In Re EstradaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1965
  4. People v. BrownCalifornia Supreme Court · 2012
  5. People v. FloodCalifornia Supreme Court · 1998

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

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. People v. MooringCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2017
  2. People v. MooringCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2017

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

Powered by the Exa API