Legal Opinion

People v. Looney

California Court of Appeal

Decided December 22, 2004No. B173593PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion

HASTINGS, J.

INTRODUCTION

After conducting a preliminary hearing, the magistrate held defendants Burl and Judy Looney to answer on, inter alia, four counts of forgery based upon their actions in inducing Joseph Wickers, who was mentally infirm, to execute several testamentary-related documents. (Pen. Code, § 470, subd. (c).) In the superior court, defendants moved to set aside that portion of the information charging them with forgery on the basis that their actions did not fall within the ambit of the charging statute. (§ 995 .) The court granted the motion. This appeal by the People…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Buck v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1965
  2. People v. NessethCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1954
  3. People v. EidCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1994
  4. People v. ParkerCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1967
  5. People v. BresinCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1966

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

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. People v. MartinezCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2008

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

Powered by the Exa API