Legal Opinion

People v. Sutter

California Court of Appeal

Decided August 5, 1982No. Crim. 4735PublishedCited by 42 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion

CONKLIN, J. *

Appellant, Michael Claud Sutter, and Archie May-hew (not a party to this appeal) were charged with violation of Penal Code section 211, robbery. There were special allegations that Mayhew used a firearm (Pen. Code, § 12022.5) and that appellant was armed as a principal (Pen. Code, § 12022 subd. (a)).

Thereafter, the court accepted defendant Mayhew’s guilty plea to robbery in count I (Pen. Code, § 211) without any special allegations. Mayhew had not been sentenced at the time of appellant’s trial.

Appellant was convicted of robbery and the jury made a true finding that he was…

2Cases cited35 opinions

  1. Brady v. MarylandSupreme Court of the United States · 1963
  2. Davis v. AlaskaSupreme Court of the United States · 1974
  3. Chambers v. MississippiSupreme Court of the United States · 1973
  4. Roviaro v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1957
  5. Washington v. TexasSupreme Court of the United States · 1967

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

3Cited by42 opinions

  1. People v. MirandaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1987
  2. People v. MorrisCalifornia Supreme Court · 1991
  3. People v. LindbergCalifornia Supreme Court · 2008
  4. People v. CudjoCalifornia Supreme Court · 1993
  5. People v. SteeleCalifornia Supreme Court · 2002

37 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