Legal Opinion
People v. Hill
California Court of Appeal
Decided August 31, 2006No. C050155PublishedCited by 19 opinions
[CERTIFIED FOR PARTIAL PUBLICATION*]
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
NICHOLSON, J.
Defendant made a criminal threat for the benefit of a criminal street gang. Sentenced to prison, he appeals, contending (1) we should apply a Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals decision requiring, for a gang enhancement, that the crime be committed with the intent to enable or further other criminal conduct by the gang and therefore find there was insufficient evidence to support the gang enhancement here, and (2) the trial court erred in calculating his presentence custody credits. We decline to adopt the Ninth Circuit’s reasoning because it conflicts with the plain language…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Kenneth D. Oxborrow, Petitioner-Appellee/cross-Appellant v. Kenneth O. Eikenberry, Norman Carlson, Respondents-Appellants/cross-AppelleesCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1989
- People v. RomeroCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2006
- Anthony Garcia v. Tom L. Carey, WardenCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2005
- People v. BurnettCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2003
3Cited by19 opinions
- People v. AlbillarCalifornia Supreme Court · 2010
- People v. WilliamsCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2009
- People v. RamonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2009
- Briceno v. ScribnerCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2009
- Emery v. ClarkCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2011
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.