Legal Opinion

People v. Reyes

California Court of Appeal

Decided January 29, 1992No. A053930PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion

LOW, J. *

We hold that omission of the definition of aiding and abetting where such instructions were required is not reversible per se, but may be subject to harmless error analysis. We adopt for review of this type of instructional error the limited harmless error analysis outlined in Carella v. California (1989) 491 U.S. 263 [105 L.Ed.2d 218, 109 S.Ct. 2419], and find the error was harmless on these facts.

Miguel Angel Reyes appeals his conviction for sale or transportation of cocaine (Heath & Saf. Code, § 11352). We affirm.

In December 1990, an undercover officer from the Department…

2Cases cited19 opinions

  1. Chapman v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1967
  2. Estelle v. McGuireSupreme Court of the United States · 1991
  3. Rose v. ClarkSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
  4. Yates v. EvattSupreme Court of the United States · 1991
  5. Pope v. IllinoisSupreme Court of the United States · 1987

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

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. People v. ConsuegraCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1994
  2. People v. DelgadoCalifornia Supreme Court · 2013
  3. P. v. DelgadoCalifornia Supreme Court · 2013
  4. People v. DelgadoCalifornia Supreme Court · 2013

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

Powered by the Exa API