People v. Perez
- 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 5/16/18
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF CALIFORNIA
THE PEOPLE, ) ) Plaintiff and Respondent, ) ) S104144 v. ) ) JOSEPH ANDREW PEREZ, JR., ) ) Contra Costa County Defendant and Appellant. ) Super. Ct. No. 990453-3 ____________________________________)
ORDER MODIFYING OPINION AND DENYING PETITION FOR REHEARING
THE COURT: The opinion in this matter filed March 1, 2018, and appearing at 4 Cal.5th 421, is modified as follows: 1. At the end of the first full paragraph on page 443, after the sentence ending “they had views on the case,” the following sentence is added: “We likewise conclude that the trial court’s decision did not amount to constitutional error.” 2. At the end of the first paragraph on page 444, after the sentence ending in “discretion in these circumstances,” the following sentence is added: “Nor has Perez established that the time allotted for voir dire violated his constitutional rights.” These modifications do not affect the judgment. The petition for rehearing is denied.
Cites, in this corpus
- People v. Perez S104144 · 2018-03-01