Legal Opinion · Dissent

People v. Mejia

California Court of Appeal

Decided June 11, 1999No. G022388Published

1Dissent

CROSBY, J., Dissenting.

Our Supreme Court says this about the subject at hand (except when it is saying the opposite)1: “When the statutory language is clear and unambiguous, there is no need for construction and courts should not indulge in it. [Citation.] The plain language of the statute establishes what was intended by the Legislature. (See People v. Ramirez (1995) 33 Cal.App.4th 559, 566 [39 Cal.Rptr.2d 374] [it is unnecessary to look beyond the plain words of the statute to determine intent].)” (People v. Fuhrman (1997) 16 Cal.4th 930, 937 [67 Cal.Rptr.2d 1, 941 P.2d 1189]; Ladd v.…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Keeler v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1970
  2. People v. PietersCalifornia Supreme Court · 1991
  3. People v. DavisCalifornia Supreme Court · 1981
  4. Ladd v. County of San MateoCalifornia Supreme Court · 1996
  5. People v. FuhrmanCalifornia Supreme Court · 1997

3 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