legal news

Home |  Link Directory |  Forum |  Gallery |  Cases |  CA Discovery Law

Register | Forgot Password
Search Members New Articles
  1. Fear Not Law Articles
  2. CA Unpub Decisions
  3. P. v. Frazier
  4. Comments on P. v. Frazier

P. v. Frazier
This case arises from a construction dispute. A homeowner testified that defendant did not competently complete portions of a construction contract for which he was paid. Defendant testified that the homeowner improperly used his contractor’s license without his knowledge, refused to provide him with construction plans and mischaracterized his role in the project. Defendant also denied diverting any funds.
Defendant was convicted of felony diversion of construction funds. (Count I – Pen. Code,[1] § 484b.) After sentencing, the Attorney General moved the trial court to revoke defendant’s contractor’s license. (See Bus. & Prof., §§ 7090, 7106.) The trial court granted the motion.
The applicable version of section 484b distinguished between felony and misdemeanor violations based on whether the defendant diverted funds “in excess of $1,000.” Defendant contends that the court was required to submit to the jury the issue of whether the diverted funds were “in excess of $1,000,” and that its failure to do so was error. (See Apprendi v. New Jersey (2000) 530 U.S. 466, 489 (Apprendi).) We agree, but find the error harmless beyond a reasonable doubt. (See People v. Sengpadychith (2001) 26 Cal.4th 316, 324-326 [Chapman[2] standard applies].)
The evidence at trial suggested that defendant committed more than one discrete violation of section 484b, yet only one count was charged. The trial court did not issue a unanimity instruction, and defendant contends this was error. We agree. We are unable to conclude that this error was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt, and therefore reverse.
Defendant also contends that the manner in which the court revoked his contractor’s license violated his right to due process. Because we reverse the conviction on which it was based, we reverse the revocation order without reaching the due process contention.

Post Reply
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