Legal Opinion

People v. Sandoval

California Supreme Court

Decided July 19, 2007No. S148917PublishedCited by 228 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion

GEORGE, C. J.

We granted review to determine whether defendant’s Sixth Amendment rights as defined in Cunningham v. California (2007) 549 U.S. 270 [166 L.Ed.2d 856, 127 S.Ct. 856] (Cunningham) were violated by the imposition of an upper term sentence and, if so, the remedy to which she is entitled. In Cunningham, the United States Supreme Court disagreed with this court’s decision in People v. Black (2005) 35 Cal.4th 1238 [29 Cal.Rptr.3d 740, 113 P.3d 534] (Black I) and held that California’s determinate sentencing law (DSL) violates a defendant’s federal constitutional right to a jury…

2Cases cited41 opinions

  1. Apprendi v. New JerseySupreme Court of the United States · 2000
  2. Chapman v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1967
  3. United States v. BookerSupreme Court of the United States · 2004
  4. Blakely v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 2004
  5. Almendarez-Torres v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1998

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

3Cited by228 opinions

  1. People v. WilsonCalifornia Supreme Court · 2008
  2. The People v. EdwardsCalifornia Supreme Court · 2013
  3. People v. GiordanoCalifornia Supreme Court · 2007
  4. People v. StampsCalifornia Supreme Court · 2020
  5. Butler v. CurryCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2008

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

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

Powered by the Exa API