PEOPLE v. VAN NGUYEN

Reset A A Font size: Print

Court of Appeal, Fourth District, Division 3, California.

The PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. Tien VAN NGUYEN, Defendant and Appellant.

No. G005664.

Decided: May 11, 1990

Appellant's petition for rehearing is GRANTED.   Respondent has 30 days from the date of this order to respond to the points raised in the petition.   Specifically, respondent should address the question of allocation of the burden of producing evidence and the standard of proof when a defendant's majority is in issue.   The significance of the decisions in People v. Burnick (1975) 14 Cal.3d 306, 121 Cal.Rptr. 488, 535 P.2d 352 and People v. Thomas (1977) 19 Cal.3d 630, 139 Cal.Rptr. 594, 566 P.2d 228 should be discussed in light of Penal Code section 1203.06 and People v. Tanner (1979) 24 Cal.3d 514, 521, 156 Cal.Rptr. 450, 596 P.2d 328.   The court also invites respondent's views on the proper remedy following this court's decision to stay the sentence on appellant's burglary conviction.

The matter will be set on the July oral argument calendar, which will be the week of the 16th.   Notice will be given of the date and time.

THE COURT:

CROSBY, J., concurs. MOORE, J., is of the opinion the petition should be DENIED.