People v. Gulbrandsen
California Court of Appeal
1ConcurrenceSims, J.
I concur in the majority opinion except for its analysis of why a consecutive sentence for the escape conviction was not mandated. I reach the same conclusion by different reasoning.
The majority conclude a mandatory consecutive sentence cannot be reconciled with the 1985 amendment to Penal Code section 4532. (Maj. opn., ante, at pp. 1555-1556; further statutory references are to the Penal Code.) However, the amendment was not in place when defendant committed his crime in 1984.
I think we must first ascertain the meaning of the statute the defendant violated. The 1985 amendment would be…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- People v. AndersonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1987
- People v. CaudilloCalifornia Supreme Court · 1978
- Long Beach Police Officers Assn. v. City of Long BeachCalifornia Supreme Court · 1988
- In Re FinkCalifornia Supreme Court · 1967
- People v. VeaseyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1979
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.