legal news


Register | Forgot Password

P. v. Bell
This sentencing appeal is before us for the third time, following the United States Supreme Courts remand, with directions to reconsider the appeal in light of Cunningham v. California (2007) 549 U.S. __ [127 S.Ct. 856] (Cunningham). The issues are whether the aggravation of appellant Michael Bells principal term sentence, based on the trial courts finding that the crime involved great violence, violated appellants Sixth and Fourteenth Amendment right to jury trial, and if so whether the deprivation was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt. Court conclude, as Court did before, that the upper term sentence was unconstitutionally imposed. We further find, however, that the error was harmless. Court therefore affirm the judgment.

Search thread for
Download thread as



Quick Reply

Your Name:
Your Comment:

smiling face wink grin cool nod sticking out tongue raised eyebrow confused shocked shaking head disapproval rolling eyes sad mad

Click an emoji to insert it into your message. You may use BB Codes in your message.
Spam Prevention:

    Home | About Us | Privacy | Subscribe
    © 2025 Fearnotlaw.com The california lawyer directory

  Copyright © 2025 Result Oriented Marketing, Inc.

attorney
scale