Legal Opinion

People v. Smith

California Court of Appeal

Decided April 24, 2007No. B189383PublishedCited by 3 opinions

[CERTIFIED FOR PARTIAL PUBLICATION*]

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion

EPSTEIN, P. J.

Appellant Orlando Terrel Smith argues the trial court improperly imposed a deadly weapon use enhancement (Pen. Code, § 12022, subd. (b)(1)) 1 because he used the weapon (a knife) to kill a dog rather than a human being, and because, he claims, use of the knife is an element of the crime of animal cruelty (§ 597, subd. (a)) as charged. In the published portion of this opinion, we reject both arguments. 2 In the unpublished portion of the opinion, we consider appellant’s contentions that the court erred in allowing a police officer to testify to statements that were not…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. People v. SengpadychithCalifornia Supreme Court · 2001
  2. People v. HansenCalifornia Supreme Court · 1994
  3. People v. WimsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1995
  4. People v. LopezCalifornia Supreme Court · 2003
  5. People v. McGeeCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1993

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

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. People v. GreenCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2011
  2. State v. Hon. brain/huCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2018
  3. The People v. Alvisar CA5California Court of Appeal · 2013

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

Powered by the Exa API