Skip to content
Name: People v. Mumm
Case #: D035303
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 4 DCA
Division: 1
Opinion Date: 05/24/2002
Subsequent History: Rev. & depublication request denied 7/17/02.

Appellant did not waive his right to challenge an Arizona prior conviction because when he waived his right to appeal based on "issues regarding priors allegations," the court had not yet decided at that time whether the prior was a strike. The Arizona robbery qualified as a strike because both it and the California robbery statute require an intent to deprive the owner of possession of property either permanently or for an unreasonable length of time or an intent to deal with the owner’s property in such a way that there is a substantial risk of permanent…

View Full Summary
Name: People v. Zangari
Case #: A091689
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 1 DCA
Division: 4
Opinion Date: 06/21/2001
Subsequent History: Rev. granted 10/10/01 as S099489

(Editor's note: review granted) Characterizing People v. Marquez (1993)16 Cal.App.4th 115 as wrongly decided, the court held that Oregon statutory definition of theft had always made clear that as long as there was a purpose of depriving the owner of property so as to create an unreasonable risk of permanent loss, the mens rea element of theft was satisfied, even if the intent was to deprive the owner of possession for less than a permanent period. Also, the entire record of the Oregon conviction showed the asportation element of burglary was satisfied. Thus, appellant's prior Oregon burglary conviction was a…

View Full Summary