legal news


Register | Forgot Password

P. v. Lee
As to the premeditation enhancement, Lee argues this enhancement must be stricken from the judgment and the matter remanded for resentencing because the prosecution improperly refiled this enhancement after its dismissal by the magistrate at the preliminary hearing.[1] Specifically, Lee argues the magistrate made a finding of fact that was fatal to the enhancement and barred its refiling in the information. We agree. Lee further argues that the sentence for his conviction for dissuading Aguilar as a witness must be stayed under Penal Code section 654.[2] We also agree with this contention. The record reveals that the offenses against Aguilar—attempted murder, assault with a deadly weapon, and dissuading a witness—were all incident to one objective, i.e., to prevent Aguilar from calling the police, and accordingly represent an indivisible course of conduct for which multiple punishment is prohibited under section 654. The trial court was therefore required to stay the sen

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