Legal Opinion · Dissent

People v. Williams

California Supreme Court

Decided May 16, 2005No. S114184Published

1Dissent

BAXTER, J.,

Dissenting.—The majority holds that the People have no right to appeal—and thereby creates the possibility that the People have no right to challenge at all—a magistrate’s decision at or before a preliminary hearing to reduce a felony wobbler to a misdemeanor under Penal Code section 17, subdivision (b)(5).1 I respectfully disagree.

The result reached by the majority is surprising. As the majority concedes (maj. opn., ante, at p. 833), the People have the right to appeal the very same determination when made at sentencing. (People v. Statum (2002) 28 Cal.4th 682 [122 Cal.Rptr.2d…

2Cases cited12 opinions

  1. People v. Superior Court (Romero)California Supreme Court · 1996
  2. United States v. Loud HawkSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
  3. People v. WilliamsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1998
  4. Olson v. CoryCalifornia Supreme Court · 1983
  5. People v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1997

7 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