People v. Hicks

California Supreme Court

People v. Hicks

367 P.3d 6, 200 Cal. Rptr. 3d 7

California Supreme Court·Decided March 23, 2016·No. No. S232218.·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

The petition for review is granted. The issue to be briefed and argued is limited to whether the trial court erred when it refused to inform the jury at the retrial of a murder charge that defendant had been convicted of gross vehicular manslaughter in the first trial. (Compare People v. Batchelor (2014) 229 Cal.App.4th 1102, 178 Cal.Rptr.3d 28.) (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 8.516(a)(1).)

KRUGER, J., was absent and did not participate.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

The petition for review is granted. The issue to be briefed and argued is limited to whether the trial court erred when it refused to inform the jury at the retrial of a murder charge that defendant had been convicted of gross vehicular manslaughter in the first trial. (Compare People v. Batchelor (2014) 229 Cal.App.4th 1102, 178 Cal.Rptr.3d 28.) (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 8.516(a)(1).)

KRUGER, J., was absent and did not participate.

People v. Hicks, 367 P.3d 6, 200 Cal. Rptr. 3d 7 (Cal. 2016).

Pincite

367 P.3d 6 (People v. Hicks) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related