Legal Opinion

People v. Fedalizo

California Court of Appeal

Decided March 30, 2016No. B263029PublishedCited by 16 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion

BLUMENFELD, J.*—

INTRODUCTION

While representing himself, defendant Baltazar Culbadora Fedalizo admitted he had violated his felony probation in this case by committing another crime in a new case and was sentenced in both cases to an aggregate three-year term in county jail. After the passage of Proposition 47, defendant petitioned to recall his sentence in both cases. The trial court appointed counsel for him, granted the petition in this case only, and resentenced him on three misdemeanor convictions to three consecutive terms of 364 days in county jail to be served concurrently with…

2Cases cited36 opinions

  1. Johnson v. ZerbstSupreme Court of the United States · 1938
  2. Denham v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1970
  3. People v. DoolinCalifornia Supreme Court · 2009
  4. People v. ColeCalifornia Supreme Court · 2004
  5. People v. MarshallCalifornia Supreme Court · 1997

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

3Cited by16 opinions

  1. Gutierrez v. Carmax Auto Superstores Cal., California Court of Appeal, 5th District2018
  2. People v. Simms, California Court of Appeal, 5th District2018
  3. In re GuiomarCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2016
  4. Gutierrez v. CarMax Auto Superstores California, LLCCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2018
  5. Gutierrez v. CarMax Auto Superstores etc.California Court of Appeal · 2018

11 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