Cal. Codes » Penal Code / PRELIMINARY PROVISIONS
California Codes

Cal. Penal Code § 12 (2026)

Preliminary Provisions

✓ leginfo export of Sept. 26, 2026 (applied Oct. 1, 2026)
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section CA-LEGleginfo.legislature.ca.gov JustiaCode on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

The several sections of this Code which declare certain crimes to be punishable as therein mentioned, devolve a duty upon the Court authorized to pass sentence, to determine and impose the punishment prescribed.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 27 cases (3 in the last 5 years), 1945–2024 · leading case: United States v. Moses Corona-Sanchez, 291 F.3d 1201 (9th Cir. 2002).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
United States v. Moses Corona-Sanchez, 291 F.3d 1201 (9th Cir. 2002). “Cal.Penal Code § 12. For the rest of their lives, felons (but not misdemeanants) are denied the right to vote, see, e.”
People v. Alford, 180 Cal. App. 4th 1463 (Cal. Ct. App. 2010). “(Pen. Code, § 12; [case citations].) Pursuant to this duty the court must either sentence the defendant or grant probation in a lawful manner; it has no other discretion.”
People v. Woods, 191 Cal. App. 4th 269 (Cal. Ct. App. 2010). “(Pen. Code, § 12; People v. Floyd P. (1988) 198 Cal.”
Peracchi v. Superior Court, 70 P.3d 1054 (Cal. 2003). “(Pen. Code, §§ 12, 1191, 1202; Cal. Rules of Court, rule 4.”
People v. Sidener, 375 P.2d 641 (Cal. 1962). · cites it 2× “) If charges have not been dismissed pursuant to the authority granted by the Legislature, the court must pass sentence as *650 prescribed by statute (Pen. Code, § 12) and may not impose any sentence other than that prescribed.”
In re Andrews, 555 P.2d 97 (Cal. 1976). · cites it 2× “Given the admonition of Chambers to construe section 1202b liberally with a view toward promoting its primary objective of rehabilitating youthful offenders, I would reject the majority's restrictive construction of the section.”
People v. FLOYD P., 198 Cal. App. 3d 608 (Cal. Ct. App. 1988). · cites it 2× “We note, however, that on remand the trial court cannot simply resentence the defendant in accordance with the plea bargain.”
People v. Cattaneo, 217 Cal. App. 3d 1577 (Cal. Ct. App. 1990). “4, subdivision (e), it is required to determine that there are circumstances in mitigation and to state the reasons in the record. (Ibid.) In the case at bar, while the court found factors in mitigation, it did so in the context of staying the enhancement, which it had no…”
People v. Eberhardt, 186 Cal. App. 3d 1112 (Cal. Ct. App. 1986). “As to the remaining three counts, two of robbery and one of burglary, defendant was not informed of the disposition of these counts or the punishment imposed therefor.”
In re Sandel, 412 P.2d 806 (Cal. 1966). “The question to be determined is whether the Adult Authority has the power to “correct” an erroneous sentence of a trial court.”
People v. Jackson, 196 Cal. App. 3d 380 (Cal. Ct. App. 1987). “(Pen. Code, §§ 12, 1170, subd. (b); rule 433(c)(1).”
People v. Baylor, 207 Cal. App. 3d 232 (Cal. Ct. App. 1989). · cites it 2× “Rather, “It is well settled that, subject to constitutional limitations, the Legislature possesses the exclusive power to define criminal offenses and prescribe punishment.”
Show all 27 citing cases →
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.