Consecutive Offenses

Name: People v. Beman
Case #: A153841
Court: CA Supreme Court
District 1 DCA
Division: 2
Opinion Date: 02/21/2019
  • Categories: Consecutive Offenses, Conspiracy, Crimes, Double Punishment (PC 654), Sentencing

Trial court did not err by imposing consecutive sentences for conspiracy and the substantive offenses. Beman pleaded no contest to one count of conspiracy to commit human trafficking based on allegations that for more than seven years he and his…

View Full Summary
Name: People v. Torres
Case #: A146958
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 1 DCA
Division: 1
Opinion Date: 05/10/2018
  • Categories: Consecutive Offenses, Prop 36 - Three Strikes, Sentencing, Three Strike Priors

Trial court erred in ruling it was required to impose consecutive sentences for five violent felony sex offenses under the Three Strikes law. Torres was convicted of robbery and multiple sex offenses (including five counts of digital penetration (Pen. Code,…

View Full Summary
Name: People v. Epperson
Case #: A145868
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 1 DCA
Division: 5
Opinion Date: 01/09/2017
  • Categories: Attempts, Consecutive Offenses, Crimes, Limitations on, Sentencing

Pursuant to Penal Code section 664, the penalty for attempted first degree residential robbery in concert is one-half the term set forth in section 213, subdivision (a)(1)(A). A jury convicted Epperson and his two codefendants of a number of offenses,…

View Full Summary
Name: People v. Woodworth
Case #: F069139
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 5 DCA
Opinion Date: 03/29/2016
  • Categories: Consecutive Offenses, Limitations on, Sentencing

In a case where defendant was convicted of dissuading a witness from reporting a felony assault, Penal Code section 1170.15 did not require the trial court to impose a full consecutive sentence for the dissuading conviction. When the trial court…

View Full Summary
Name: People v. Leon
Case #: F065532
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 5 DCA
Opinion Date: 01/13/2016
  • Categories: Abuse of Discretion, Areas Constitutional Law, Confessions, Confront/Cross-exam, Consecutive Offenses, Due Process, Indeterminate Sentencing, Interrogations & Confessions, Involuntary/Coerced, Miranda v. Arizona, Sentencing

Defendant's un-Mirandized statement during jail classification interview that he was a gang member should have been suppressed under People v. Elizalde (2015) 61 Cal.4th 523. Leon, Centeno, Palofox, and Rivas, were charged with a number of offenses arising from a…

View Full Summary
Name: People v. Hojnowski
Case #: A139455
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 1 DCA
Division: 5
Opinion Date: 08/04/2014
  • Categories: Consecutive Offenses, Legislation, Sentencing, Statutory Construction, Three Strike Priors

Consecutive terms were required for prison inmate's three battery by gassing offenses even though he was sentenced under the Three Strikes law. Appellant was convicted of three counts of aggravated battery by "gassing" under Penal Code section 4501.1 based on…

View Full Summary
Name: People v. LaPierre
Case #: B239304
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 2 DCA
Division: 6
Opinion Date: 07/03/2013
  • Categories: Consecutive Offenses, Sentencing

Trial court properly imposed state term to run consecutive to federal sentence previously imposed. A California trial court sentenced LaPierre to prison, the sentence to run consecutively to a federal sentence that was imposed previously. Thereafter, appeals in both the…

View Full Summary
Name: People v. Beard
Case #: C066320
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 3 DCA
Opinion Date: 07/13/2012
  • Categories: Consecutive Offenses, Enhancements, Sentencing

A Health and Safety Code section 11370.2 enhancement for a prior drug conviction is not subject to the one-third limit of Penal Code section 1170.1. Appellant was convicted of several offenses and sentenced to an aggregate term of 22 years…

View Full Summary
Name: People v. Solis
Case #: C063851
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 3 DCA
Opinion Date: 06/13/2012
  • Categories: Areas Constitutional Law, Consecutive Offenses, Due Process, Sentencing

The legal standard for imposing full consecutive sentences where multiple sex offenses against the same victim occur on "separate occasions" pursuant to Penal Code section 667.6, subdivision (d) is not unconstitutionally vague. Penal Code section 667.6, subdivision (d) provides that…

View Full Summary
Name: People v. Maharaj
Case #: C066059
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 3 DCA
Opinion Date: 03/23/2012
  • Categories: Consecutive Offenses, Sentencing

Trial court properly imposed full consecutive sentences for forcible sex offenses because the offenses are each included in Penal Code section 667.6, subdivision (e). Appellant was convicted of sex offenses against one child under the age of 14 years. The…

View Full Summary