Legal Opinion · Dissent

People v. Hill

California Court of Appeal

Decided May 6, 1992No. A050670Published

[Opinion certified for partial publication.*]

1Dissent

KLINE, P. J., Dissenting.

The trial court’s refusal to instruct on misdemeanor distribution of an imitation controlled substance (Health & Saf. Code, § 11680)1 is, in my view, reversible error.

I

The majority concludes that instructions on misdemeanor distribution of an imitation controlled substance (§ 11680) were not required even though this lesser related offense is “closely related” to the charged offense (§ 11355) within the meaning of People v. Geiger (1984) 35 Cal.3d 510, 531 [199 Cal.Rptr. 45, 674 P.2d 1303, 50 A.L.R.4th 1055]. This is so, the majority reasons, because “the misdemeanor…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. Beck v. AlabamaSupreme Court of the United States · 1980
  2. People v. WickershamCalifornia Supreme Court · 1982
  3. People v. GeigerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1984
  4. People v. TenorioCalifornia Supreme Court · 1970
  5. People v. DavisCalifornia Supreme Court · 1981

5 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