People v. Bryant, Smith and Wheeler
- Area
- criminal
Analysis
No analysis yet. When one exists it is a model's reading of this opinion — the rulings it reviewed, whether it agrees with the court, and the authorities it checked — shown beside the court's own disposition, never in place of it. How analyses are made.
Opinion
Filed 10/1/14
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF CALIFORNIA
THE PEOPLE, ) ) S049596 Plaintiff and Respondent, ) ) Los Angeles County v. ) Super. Ct. No. A711739 ) STANLEY BRYANT, DONALD ) FRANKLIN SMITH, and LEROY ) WHEELER, ) ) Defendants and Appellants. ) ____________________________________)
ORDER MODIFYING OPINION AND DENYING PETITION FOR REHEARING
THE COURT: The opinion herein, filed on August 25, 2014, appearing at 60 Cal.4th 335, is modified as follows: On pages 467 through 468, the sentence reading “To the extent their absences at proceedings based on oral waivers violated the statutes, defendants have presented no support for the conclusion there is either a reasonable probability at the guilt phase or reasonable possibility at the penalty phase that the outcome would have been more favorable had defendants been required to make written waivers or forced to attend the proceedings despite their wishes to be absent,” is modified to read, “To the extent their absences at proceedings without a waiver or with only an oral waiver violated the statutes, defendants have presented no support for the conclusion there is either a reasonable probability at the guilt phase or reasonable possibility at the penalty phase that the outcome would have been more favorable had defendants been required to make written waivers or forced to attend the proceedings despite their wishes to be absent.” This modification does not affect the judgment.
Cites, in this corpus
- People v. Bryant, Smith and Wheeler S049596 · 2014-08-25