Legal Opinion

People v. Alvarado

California Court of Appeal

Decided February 16, 2001No. H020636PublishedCited by 39 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion

WUNDERLICH, J.

I. Introduction

Penal Code section 667.61,1 commonly known as the “One Strike” law (People v. Rayford (1994) 9 Cal.4th 1, 8 [36 Cal.Rptr.2d 317, 884 P.2d 1369]), mandates indeterminate life terms for those who, among other things, commit a rape “during the commission of a burglary.” (§ 667.61, subds. (b) & (e)(2).)2 In this case, we hold that the phrase “during the commission of a burglary” includes the period of time that a burglar remains on the premises after entry and extends until the burglar has reached a place of temporary safety.

*184II. Statement of the Case

A jury…

2Cases cited71 opinions

  1. Strickland v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
  2. Gregg v. GeorgiaSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
  3. Solem v. HelmSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
  4. Harmelin v. MichiganSupreme Court of the United States · 1991
  5. Rummel v. EstelleSupreme Court of the United States · 1980

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

3Cited by39 opinions

  1. People v. JonesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2002
  2. People v. SinohuiCalifornia Supreme Court · 2002
  3. People v. Jose P.California Court of Appeal · 2003
  4. People v. CallesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2012
  5. People v. FraustoCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2010

34 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