People v. Dobson
California Court of Appeal
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
POOCHIGIAN, Acting P. J.
INTRODUCTION
Defendant Steven Jay Dobson contends Penal Code section 1170.126 1 should be “interpreted” to permit people found not guilty by reason of insanity and committed to a state hospital (NGI committees) 2 to petition for recalculation of their maximum term of confinement. He also asserts that a contrary interpretation would violate equal protection principles. We reject his arguments and affirm.
FACTS
“In 1998, appellant Steven Jay Dobson pleaded guilty to vehicle theft (Veh. Code, § 10851, subd. (a)) and admitted four prior strike convictions. He also…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- In Re EstradaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1965
- Rodriguez v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1987
- People v. BrownCalifornia Supreme Court · 2012
- Trope v. KatzCalifornia Supreme Court · 1995
- People v. YearwoodCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2013
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by11 opinions
- People v. K.P., California Court of Appeal, 5th District2018
- People v. Harris, California Court of Appeal, 5th District2017
- In re Allen A. CA2/3California Court of Appeal · 2016
- People v. BarnerCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2024
- People v. BarnerCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2024
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.