legal news


Register | Forgot Password

P. v. Daniels
Arlance Dion Daniels appeals from the judgment entered following his conviction by jury on count 1 possession of a controlled substance (Health & Saf. Code, 11350, subd. (a)) and count 2 possession of a smoking device (Health & Saf. Code, 11364) with admissions that he suffered a prior felony conviction (Pen. Code, 667, subd. (d)) and five prior felony convictions for which he served separate prison terms (Pen. Code, 667.5, subd. (b)). The court sentenced him to prison for six years.
On the merits, even if disclosure was required under Penal Code section 1054.1, subdivision (f), the prosecutor disclosed the anticipated testimony as soon he learned about it; therefore, no discovery violation occurred. Even if a discovery violation occurred, appellant never sought the usual remedy, a continuance, and exclusion of the anticipated testimony would have been improper since other remedies had not been exhausted. Finally, there was no prejudice from any discovery violation; therefore, reversal of the judgment is not warranted.


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