legal news


Register | Forgot Password

P. v. Woodfork
A jury convicted defendant of first degree felony murder, with a special circumstance that the murder was committed during an attempted robbery.
On appeal, defendant contends the trial court erred (1) in instructing with CALJIC No. 2.51 on motive; (2) in instructing with CALJIC No. 2.61 that a defendant may simply rely on the prosecution’s evidence (after defendant had testified); (3) in imposing a parole revocation restitution fine when defendant was sentenced to life without the possibility of parole; and (4) in calculating defendant’s presentence custody credit. Defendant further contends that the first two alleged errors were cumulatively prejudicial. Court find no prejudicial error regarding the first two contentions, and therefore found no cumulative error. Court agreed with the second two contentions, and modified the judgment accordingly. As modified, court affirmed 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