legal news


Register | Forgot Password

P. v. Shum
Defendant Michael Shum was convicted after jury trial of possession of methamphetamine for sale (Health & Saf. Code, 11378).[1] He admitted having three prior possession-for-sale convictions ( 11370.2, subd. (c)), and having served a prior prison term (Pen. Code, 667.5, subd. (b)). The trial court sentenced defendant to 11 years in state prison.
On appeal, defendant contends that: (1) the trial court prejudicially erred by failing to instruct the jury sua sponte on the lesser-included offense of simple possession; (2) the court prejudicially erred by failing to enforce defense counsels offered stipulation; (3) the court prejudicially erred while instructing the jury on the corpus delicti rule; (4) counsel rendered ineffective assistance by failing to object to gang evidence and by failing to request that the evidence be stricken; (5) counsel rendered ineffective assistance by failing to object to evidence of defendants misdemeanor conviction for spousal battery; and (6) there was prejudicial cumulative error. Court disagree with these contentions and, therefore, 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