Legal Opinion

People v. Tambini

California Court of Appeal

Decided August 21, 1969No. Crim. 15629PublishedCited by 17 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtDunn, J.

By information Tambini, Dawson, Houltin and Fernandez were charged with possessing marijuana for sale, a felony, in violation of Health and Safety Code, section 11530.5. Following the preliminary examination they were held to answer in the superior court. The record before us is silent as to disposition of Houltin’s case. After several continuances, the case against Dawson, Fernandez and Tambini was called for trial December 6, 1967. Dawson failed to appear and his bail was forfeited. Trial of Tambini and Fernandez was ultimately continued to December 21, 1967, wdien Fernandez’s trial was…

2Cases cited24 opinions

  1. Chimel v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1969
  2. People v. FrancisCalifornia Supreme Court · 1969
  3. People v. TerryCalifornia Supreme Court · 1964
  4. People v. MarshallCalifornia Supreme Court · 1968
  5. People v. BenfordCalifornia Supreme Court · 1959

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

3Cited by17 opinions

  1. People v. BeemanCalifornia Supreme Court · 1984
  2. Cabell v. Lynette G.California Court of Appeal · 1976
  3. People v. OttCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1978
  4. People v. VasquezCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1972
  5. People v. RandCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1972

12 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