legal news


Register | Forgot Password

P. v. Lee
Appellant was convicted of possession of a firearm by a felon, illegal possession of an assault weapon and unlawful possession of ammunition. He contends the trial court violated Penal Code section 654 by sentencing him to a term of imprisonment on all three counts, rather than staying the sentence on two of them. Appellant also contends the trial court impermissibly imposed the upper term under Californias determinate sentencing law, using factors condemned by the United States Supreme Court in Cunningham v. California (2007) 549 U.S. [127 S.Ct. 856] (Cunningham). Finally, appellant requests a review of the trial courts in camera determination that none of the items produced pursuant to appellants Pitchess motion was discoverable. Court review the sealed transcript of the in camera hearing, but otherwise reject appellants contentions and affirm the judgment.

Search thread for
Download thread as



Quick Reply

Your Name:
Your Comment:

smiling face wink grin cool nod sticking out tongue raised eyebrow confused shocked shaking head disapproval rolling eyes sad mad

Click an emoji to insert it into your message. You may use BB Codes in your message.
Spam Prevention:

    Home | About Us | Privacy | Subscribe
    © 2025 Fearnotlaw.com The california lawyer directory

  Copyright © 2025 Result Oriented Marketing, Inc.

attorney
scale