legal news


Register | Forgot Password

P. v. Hollman
Markel Shar Hollman and others assaulted Elaine Neal over a period of about 24 hours for the purpose of eliciting the whereabouts of Neals son, Joseph Jynes, a suspect in the killing of Jamal Johnson. Most of the other perpetrators of the crimes against Neal pled guilty. Hollman and codefendant Precious Johnson stood trial. The jury convicted Hollman of torture, assault with a firearm, assault with a deadly weapon, assault by means likely to produce great bodily injury, and false imprisonment by violence. It also was found true that he personally inflicted great bodily injury.
Hollman raises three challenges to his convictions and sentence. First, Hollman contends the trial courts rulings during Neals cross-examination deprived him of his constitutional rights to due process, confrontation, and effective representation of counsel. Second, Hollman contends the trial court abused its discretion when it denied a defense request for juror contact information. Third, Hollman contends the trial court violated his constitutional rights because it imposed a sentence based upon his failure to plead guilty. Court reject Hollmans contentions and 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