Skip to content
Name: People v. Chan
Case #: B169749
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 2 DCA
Division: 5
Opinion Date: 04/12/2005

The evidence was sufficient to uphold a conviction under Penal Code section 290 where the defendant had twice submitted an incorrect address under penalty of perjury, notwithstanding the fact that the second submission involved only an error of two digits. Because the California Supreme Court has held that merely forgetting to register is not a defense to a charge under section 290, it follows that merely forgetting one's correct address is also not a defense to that charge. The court further held that the corpus delicti rule does not apply where the defendant's extrajudicial statements constitute the crime…

View Full Summary
Name: People v. Hawkins
Case #: F043865
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 5 DCA
Opinion Date: 12/01/2004

The prosecution established the corpus delicti for a violation of Health and Safety Code section 11366 independent of the defendant’s statements where the evidence showed that multiple people were currently using or had previously used the defendant’s house for smoking crack cocaine, because the jury could reasonably infer from this evidence that someone had had a purpose of using the house for selling, giving away, or using controlled substances. Furthermore, sufficient evidence supported the conviction, and where a specific intent instruction was given under CALJIC 12.08, the judge was not required to specifically instruct the jury on the meanings…

View Full Summary
Name: People v. Chan
Case #: B169749
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 2 DCA
Division: 5
Opinion Date: 10/28/2004
Subsequent History: mod. 4/28/05

Appellant was convicted of several sex offenses and a single count of failing to register. On appeal, he argued that there was insufficient evidence of the failure to register because appellant registered at an address which was only two digits away from his actual address. The court rejected the argument because there was sufficient evidence that the wrong address was given to mislead police officers as to where appellant lived as opposed to an innocent mistake. Appellant also argued that the corpus delicti rule requires that the court find the evidence insufficient. The court also rejected…

View Full Summary