People v. Lopez
California Court of Appeal
1Opinion of the Court
*696 YEGAN, J.
*651 A criminal defendant should not be punished for exercising a constitutional right as declared by the United States Supreme Court. Here, the defendants exercised their declared rights by obtaining habeas corpus relief. They should not be precluded from obtaining further relief pursuant to a subsequently enacted remedial statute which addresses vindication of the same constitutional right. Were we to do so, we would elevate form over substance. (Civil Code § 3528.)
The People appeal from postjudgment orders granting probation to respondents Raul Alberto Lopez and Freddie Chacon after…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Graham v. FloridaSupreme Court of the United States · 2010
- United States v. GoodwinSupreme Court of the United States · 1982
- Landrum v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1981
- People v. JonesCalifornia Supreme Court · 2001
- People v. ManzoCalifornia Supreme Court · 2012
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- People v. GomezCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2025
- People v. IsayevCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2025
- People v. LaraCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2025
- People v. Perez CA2/3California Court of Appeal · 2020
- People v. SortoCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2024
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.