People v. Chance
California Supreme Court
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
CORRIGAN, J.
Here we consider the actus reus required for assault. Since 1872, the Penal Code has defined assault as “an unlawful attempt, coupled with a present ability, to commit a violent injury on the person of another.” (Pen. Code, § 240.)1 This case involves only the “present ability” aspect of the crime. Nevertheless, we must consider the effect of statements in prior opinions analyzing the intent required for assault.
In People v. Colantuono (1994) 7 Cal.4th 206, 216 [26 Cal.Rptr.2d 908, 865 P.2d 704] (Colantuono), and People v. Williams (2001) 26 Cal.4th 779, 782, 784-785 [111…
2Cases cited19 opinions
- People v. HoodCalifornia Supreme Court · 1969
- People v. RodriguezCalifornia Supreme Court · 1999
- People v. KippCalifornia Supreme Court · 1998
- People v. RochaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1971
- People v. WilliamsCalifornia Supreme Court · 2001
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by55 opinions
- People v. ChunCalifornia Supreme Court · 2009
- People v. HartschCalifornia Supreme Court · 2010
- United States v. GrajedaCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2009
- Plotnik v. MeihausCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2012
- People v. Leonard CA4/1California Court of Appeal · 2014
50 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.