This is the property of the Daily Journal Corporation and fully protected by copyright. It is made available only to Daily Journal subscribers for personal or collaborative purposes and may not be distributed, reproduced, modified, stored or transferred without written permission. Please click "Reprint" to order presentation-ready copies to distribute to clients or use in commercial marketing materials or for permission to post on a website. and copyright (showing year of publication) at the bottom.

People v. Lawrence

Consecutive sentences are not mandated under three strikes law if all current convictions committed on same occasion or arise from same set of operative facts.





Cite as

2000 DJDAR 10872

Published

Nov. 1, 2000

Filing Date

Oct. 2, 2000



THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. JIMMY DALE LAWRENCE, Defendant and Appellant.
No. S070271 Ct. App. 2/7 B110417 Los Angeles County Super.Ct.No. KA031590 California Supreme Court Filed October 3, 2000
BY THE COURT:

MODIFICATION OF OPINION
        The opinion, which appears at 24 Cal.4th 219, is modified in the following respect:
        The sentence on page 233*, which currently reads, "Durant suggests that the nature and elements of the current charged offenses-for example, the extent to which common acts and elements of such offenses unfold together or overlap, and the extent to which the elements of one offense have been satisfied, rendering that offense 'completed' in the eyes of the law before the commission of further criminal acts constituting additional and separately chargeable crimes-'are additional factors the court must consider in determining whether multiple current crimes were committed on the "same occasion" and arose from the "same set of operative facts" when the offenses are committed more than seconds apart' " is deleted and replaced with the following: "Durant suggests that the nature and elements of the current charged offenses-for example, the extent to which common acts and elements of such offenses unfold together or overlap, and the extent to which the elements of one offense have been satisfied, rendering that offense 'completed' in the eyes of the law before the commission of further criminal acts constituting additional and separately chargeable crimes-are additional factors the court must consider in determining whether multiple current crimes arose from the 'same set of operative facts' when the offenses are committed more than seconds apart."

        This modification does not effect a change in the judgment.



*        See Daily Appellate Report of August 29, 2000, page 9535, column 1, lines 8-19, second full paragraph.




#250809

For reprint rights or to order a copy of your photo:

Email Jeremy_Ellis@dailyjournal.com for prices.
Direct dial: 213-229-5424