People v. Stowell
California Supreme Court
1Concurrence
BAXTER, J., Concurring.
I agree with the majority that a defendant who fails to object in the trial court forfeits appeal of any deficiency in the statutorily required finding supporting an HIV testing order imposed under Penal Code section 1202.1, subdivision (e)(6) as well as any failure to note that finding in the docket or minutes. I write separately only to question the majority’s decision not to invoke our well-settled jurisprudence relating to unobjected—to sentencing error and to rely instead on a “general forfeiture rationale.” (Maj. opn., ante, at p 1107 Because the majority does not…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Smith v. DoeSupreme Court of the United States · 2003
- People v. ScottCalifornia Supreme Court · 1994
- People v. McVickersCalifornia Supreme Court · 1992
- People v. AnsellCalifornia Supreme Court · 2001
- People v. MarchandCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2002
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.