Legal Opinion

People v. Foreman

California Court of Appeal

Decided January 31, 2005No. A105691PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion

CORRIGAN, J.

Here we conclude that forging or presenting a forged prescription to obtain drugs, in violation of Health and Safety Code section 11368, does not fall under Proposition 36.

FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

Our discussion of the facts is limited because no preliminary hearing was conducted and defendant agreed to a court trial based on the police reports. Defendant was arrested when he appeared at a pharmacy to collect a prescription for Vicodin. The prescription was written, without authorization, on a doctor’s preprinted pad. The physician’s signature was forged. Similar…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Lungren v. DeukmejianCalifornia Supreme Court · 1988
  2. People v. CantyCalifornia Supreme Court · 2004
  3. Curle v. Superior Court of Shasta CountyCalifornia Supreme Court · 2001
  4. People v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2002
  5. In Re OgeaCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2004

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

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. People v. MonizCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2006
  2. People v. HaddadCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2009

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

Powered by the Exa API