People v. Mills
California Court of Appeal
1Concurring in part, dissenting in part
TIMLIN, J., Concurring and Dissenting.
I concur in the majority’s analysis and rejection of defendant’s due process and equal protection of the law challenges to the application of Penal Code section 12021, subdivision (a) in this case.1 However, I respectfully dissent from the majority’s discussion and conclusion concerning the effect of the constitutional prohibition against ex post facto laws on the application of section 12021(a) in this case. I would reverse the judgment entered below because, in my view, the amendment to section 12021(a) which became effective on January 1, 1990—that is,…
2Cases cited23 opinions
- Weaver v. GrahamSupreme Court of the United States · 1981
- Calder v. BullSupreme Court of the United States · 1798
- Collins v. YoungbloodSupreme Court of the United States · 1990
- Beazell v. OhioSupreme Court of the United States · 1925
- Tapia v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1991
18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.