legal news


Register | Forgot Password

P. v. Mitchell
We find no merit to defendants contention the trial court erred when it denied his motion for new trial, permitted the admission of gang evidence and enhanced his punishment pursuant to Penal Code section 186.22, subdivision (b)(1). (Unless otherwise indicated, all further statutory references are to the Penal Code.) At defendants request in his appellate brief, we have independently reviewed the record of the March 7, 2007 in camera hearing conducted in the trial court under Pitchess v. Superior Court (1974) 11 Cal.3d 531, and conclude it contains no information sought in defendants pretrial motion. Defendants request that we remand his case to the trial court for the purpose of postconviction discovery is denied. Court affirm.

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
    © 2024 Fearnotlaw.com The california lawyer directory

  Copyright © 2024 Result Oriented Marketing, Inc.

attorney
scale