Legal Opinion

People v. Kellogg

California Court of Appeal

Decided June 17, 2004No. D042696PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion

HALLER, J.

Thomas Kellogg contends his public intoxication conviction constitutes constitutionally proscribed cruel and/or unusual punishment because his status as an involuntarily homeless, chronic alcoholic makes it impossible for him to avoid being intoxicated in public. We reject this contention. The public intoxication statute, Penal Code1 section 647, subdivision (f), is carefully crafted to impose criminal culpability only if the publicly intoxicated person is unable to exercise care for his or her own safety or the safety of others, or is obstructing a public way. The statute…

2Cases cited13 opinions

  1. Robinson v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1962
  2. Ewing v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 2003
  3. People v. DillonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1983
  4. Powell v. TexasSupreme Court of the United States · 1968
  5. Dewitt Easter v. District of ColumbiaCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1966

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

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. People v. Jorge D.California Court of Appeal · 2016
  2. People v. KelloggCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2004

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

Powered by the Exa API