Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

People v. Guilford

California Court of Appeals, Third District, Sacramento

September 2, 2014

THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent,
v.
MICHAEL GUILFORD, Defendant and Appellant.

THE COURT:.

IT IS ORDERED that the opinion filed herein on July 31, 2014, 228 Cal.App.4th 651, ___ Cal.Rptr.3d ___, be modified as follows and he petition for rehearing is DENIED:

1. On page 6 in footnote 4, in the parenthetical following the second complete sentence [228 Cal.App.4th 658, advance report, footnote 4, line 8] after the words “great bodily injury” add “; but see § 12022.55 [enhancement requiring intent to cause great bodily injury or death]” so that the parenthetical reads:

(People v. Poroj (2010) 190 Cal.App.4th 165, 172-176 [117 Cal.Rptr.3d 884]; see Couzens & Bigelow, The Amendment of the Three Strikes Sentencing Law (Nov. 4, 2013) Petition for Resentencing, p. 29 [“indeed, there is no crime or special penalty for committing a crime with the intent to cause great bodily injury”]; but see § 12022.55 [enhancement requiring intent to cause great bodily injury or death].)

2. On page 11, the first sentence of the first paragraph [228 Cal.App.4th 661, advance report, 2d full par., line 1] the words “the factual basis of” are to be added before the words “the trial court’s finding” so that the sentence now reads:

Defendant acknowledges we review the factual basis of the trial court’s finding under the familiar sufficiency of the evidence standard.

3. On page 13, footnote 6 [228 Cal.App.4th 663, advance report, fn. 6], delete the text of the entire footnote and replace it so that the footnote reads as follows:

The responsive and reply briefs cite to Pepper v. United States (2011) 562 U.S. ___ [179 L.Ed.2d 196, ] 31 S.Ct. 1229] (Pepper). Pepper involved the admissibility of postsentencing rehabilitation after a federal criminal sentence had been set aside on appeal.

Page 62b

(Pepper, supra, 562 U.S. at pp. ___, ___ [179 L.Ed.2d at pp. 208, 213-215].) That case has no application to a petition to recall a California sentence under the Act.

As modified, the petition for rehearing is denied. This modification does not change the judgment.


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.