People v. EMMAL
California Court of Appeal
[Opinion certified for partial publication.*]
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
BEDSWORTH, J.
A jury convicted Ronald Jay Emmal of transporting methamphetamine but found him not guilty of possessing it for sale. The trial court then found two “strike” allegations and four 1-year prior allegations to be true. Emmal claims (1) the evidence was insufficient to support his conviction; (2) the trial court provided the jury a defective definition of “transportation”; (3) the court improperly augmented his twenty-five-year-to-life sentence with three 1-year sentence enhancements; and (4). his sentence constitutes cruel and unusual punishment. We find no merit in any of…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- People v. DanielsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1969
- Mercer v. Department of Motor VehiclesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1991
- People v. RogersCalifornia Supreme Court · 1971
- People v. MezaCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1995
- People v. EastmanCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1993
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by15 opinions
- People v. MartinezCalifornia Supreme Court · 2018
- People v. OrmistonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2003
- People v. RamosCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2016
- People v. Z.A.California Court of Appeal · 2012
- People v. LaCrossCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2001
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.