P. v. Hale
Odell Hale appeals from his conviction of corporal injury to a spouse, assault by means likely to produce great bodily harm, criminal threats, and assault with a deadly weapon. Appellant argues the court (1) abused its discretion in refusing to dismiss two prior strike convictions pursuant to Penal Code section 1385[1]; (2) was unaware of its authority to dismiss a prior strike conviction as to one count and not another; (3) violated section 654 by sentencing appellant to concurrent life terms on counts 5 and 8; and (4) improperly interrogated witnesses, exhibiting bias against appellant and violating his right to due process. Although the courts questioning of a witness did constitute error on one occasion, the error was not prejudicial. Court find no error in the other rulings, and affirm the judgment.
Comments on P. v. Hale