Legal Opinion
In Re Birdwell
California Court of Appeal
Decided November 5, 1996No. B095736PublishedCited by 22 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
YEGAN J.
In People v. Winslow (1995) 40 Cal.App.4th 680, 683 [46 Cal.Rptr.2d 901], we said: “As the moving party in a criminal action, it is the People’s obligation not only to plead and prove an enhancement, but also to tender adequate instructions and verdict forms so that a lawful determination can be made and sustained on appeal. All too frequently, this responsibility is lost upon the prosecutor who concentrates on the substantive charge or charges.” Here a defective verdict form has come back to haunt the People. This opinion should serve as a reminder that extreme care should be…
2Cases cited22 opinions
- Auto Equity Sales, Inc. v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1962
- People v. ScottCalifornia Supreme Court · 1994
- In Re ClarkCalifornia Supreme Court · 1993
- People v. McDonaldCalifornia Supreme Court · 1984
- People v. BeamonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1973
17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by22 opinions
- People v. MendozaCalifornia Supreme Court · 2000
- Advanced Modular Sputtering, Inc. v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2005
- People v. SotoCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2016
- People v. JonesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2014
- People v. Cabrera, California Court of Appeal, 5th District2018
17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.