Legal Opinion

People v. Valenzuela

California Supreme Court

Decided June 3, 2019No. S239122PublishedCited by 31 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

II. DISCUSSION

Our analysis begins with a review of the pertinent statutes and how they have been construed. We then consider their application to this case. We conclude that defendant's street terrorism conviction should have been dismissed in the full resentencing that defendant must receive under Proposition 47.

A. Relevant Statutes and Case Law

1. The Crime of Street Terrorism under Section 186.22, Subdivision (a)

The Legislature originally enacted section 186.22 in 1988 as part of the California Street Terrorism Enforcement and Prevention Act, also known as the "STEP Act." (§ 186.20 et seq.)…

Also in this document: Dissent.

2Cases cited33 opinions

  1. In Re EstradaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1965
  2. People v. AlbillarCalifornia Supreme Court · 2010
  3. People v. BuycksCalifornia Supreme Court · 2018
  4. People v. JonesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1993
  5. People v. ValenciaCalifornia Supreme Court · 2017

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

3Cited by31 opinions

  1. People v. PadillaCalifornia Supreme Court · 2022
  2. People v. HendersonCalifornia Supreme Court · 2022
  3. People v. LopezCalifornia Supreme Court · 2020
  4. People v. Amaya CA4/2California Court of Appeal · 2020
  5. People v. BocanegraCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2023

26 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