Legal Opinion

People v. Moore

California Court of Appeal

Decided July 27, 1992No. B052621PublishedCited by 23 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion

EPSTEIN, J.

In this case, we hold that admonitions and waivers are insufficient to support appellant’s admission of one of the two prior convictions charged as enhancements, but that they are sufficient for the other. We also conclude that the former jeopardy principle does not bar retrial of the prior conviction that must be set aside. Finally, we agree with appellant’s contention that he was not credited for presentence custody time to which he is entitled.

The appellant, David Moore, was charged with a narcotics offense. Two prior convictions also were alleged against him. Trial of…

2Cases cited16 opinions

  1. Boykin v. AlabamaSupreme Court of the United States · 1969
  2. Lockhart v. NelsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1988
  3. United States v. TateoSupreme Court of the United States · 1964
  4. In Re TahlCalifornia Supreme Court · 1969
  5. People v. HowardCalifornia Supreme Court · 1992

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

3Cited by23 opinions

  1. People v. BarraganCalifornia Supreme Court · 2004
  2. People v. MosbyCalifornia Supreme Court · 2004
  3. People v. AllenCalifornia Supreme Court · 1999
  4. People v. FarwellCalifornia Supreme Court · 2018
  5. People v. TindallCalifornia Supreme Court · 2000

18 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