California Court of Appeal

In one of many appeals raising issues concerning the effect of trial court error in basing an upper term sentence, in part, on non-recidivist facts not submitted to a jury or admitted by the defendant, such error is harmless beyond a reasonable doubt standard of Chapman v. California (1967) 386 U.S. 18, in this case, as the pertinent facts were supported by uncontested evidence and no other reasonable conclusion could be drawn but that they were committed in the course of the criminal conduct.

Appellate Information

• Decided 05/18/2007
• Published 05/18/2007

Judges

• EPSTEIN, P.J.

Court

• California Court of Appeal

Counsel

• For Appellees:
  
• Shawn O'Laughlin, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant., Bill Lockyer and Edmund G. Brown, Jr., Attorneys General, Mary Jo Graves and Dane R. Gillette, Chief Assistant Attorneys General, Pamela C. Hamanaka, Senior Assistant Attorney General, Steven D. Matthews and G. Tracey Letteau, Deputy Attorneys General, for Plaintiff and Respondent.