Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
5 California opinions name it 1 courts 2013–2026 2 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by California courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
People v. Elliottgreen1 sentence2026(See Lawrence, at p. 195 [“Buyer’s remorse” is not a “compelling” reason “for wanting to revoke a Faretta waiver.”]; cf. People v. Elliott (1977) 70 Cal.App.3d 984, 997 [defendant’s reason for his request for counsel, that the People announced their intention to present evidence on an uncharged offense, “was a valid one”].) Third, Johnson asked the court to revoke his waiver of his right to counsel at the last possible minute, just as the court was about to pronounce his sentence. | 1 | 1 |
People v. Mockelgreen1 sentence2014(See People v. Mockel (1990) 226 Cal.App.3d 581, 587 (Mockel) [finding no error in admission of victim’s family’s letters containing irrelevant information purportedly submitted “to invoke the emotion of the court” because “judges spend much of their professional lives separating the wheat from the chaff and have extensive experience in sentencing, along with the legal training necessary to determine an appropriate sentence”].) In his reply brief, appellant argues for the first time the expected sentence at the beginning of the sentencing hearing was six years. | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in California. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
People v. Kopp
green
1 sentence2024(See Kopp, supra, 38 Cal.App.5th at p. 95 , review granted.) His attorney made such a request at the beginning of the sentencing hearing. | 1 | 2024–2024 |
People v. Briceno
green
1 sentence2013(People v. Briceno (2004) 34 Cal.4th 451, 456 .) Defendant’s current carrying and concealed 17 At the beginning of the sentencing hearing, the probation officer told the court that defendant “is not entitled to custody credits in this case” because he “was being sought as a probation absconder” at the time of his arrest. | 1 | 2013–2013 |
People v. Brown
green
1 sentence2013Nevertheless, when weighed against the aggravating factors such as defendant‟s “lack of remorse”; that “this crime involved great violence. . . . [and] [a] great threat of bodily harm”; the “high degree of cruelty, viciousness and callousness in the execution of this crime”; the vulnerability of the victims who were “asleep in their home when they [we]re intruded upon by multiple armed assailants who str[uck] with gunfire”; the “plan[ning], sophisticat[ion] and professional[ism] in the way [the robbery] was carried out”; the “high degree of monetary loss; over $10,000 in this case”; and defend | 1 | 2013–2013 |
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.