The primary issue before this court is whether the trial court erred in denying appellant's motion to strike a prior conviction alleging a Boykin-Tahl violation. Had his prior conviction been declared invalid, appellant argues he could not have been convicted of being a felon in possession of a firearm, nor could his sentence have been enhanced. We conclude that even assuming a Boykin-Tahl
Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Let's get started
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.
PEOPLE v. HARTY
Docket No. A023888.
173 Cal.App.3d 493 (1985)
219 Cal. Rptr. 85
THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. MITCHELL NEWMAN HARTY, Defendant and Appellant.
Court of Appeals of California, First District, Division Four.https://leagle.com/images/logo.png
October 21, 1985.
October 21, 1985.
Attorney(s) appearing for the Case
Edie Sussman, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.
John K. Van de Kamp, Attorney General, Thomas A. Brady and Stan M. Helfman, Deputy Attorneys General, for Plaintiff and Respondent.
Court of Appeals of California, First District, Division Four.
Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.
Cited Cases
- No Cases Found
Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.
