California Court of Appeal

Defendants' convictions for selling or possessing counterfeit marks are affirmed, where: 1) there was sufficient evidence to support their convictions; 2) the court did not commit instructional error; 3) Penal Code section 350 is not unconstitutionally vague; 4) there was no error in the court's victim restitution order; 5) the trial court did not err in refusing to consider defendant Vo's motion to disqualify the prosecution or refusing to continue the motion; and 6) the trial court did not err in denying defendant Jacqueline's motion to reduce her conviction to a misdemeanor.

Appellate Information

• Decided 01/21/2014
• Published 01/21/2014

Judges

• McCONNELL

Court

• California Court of Appeal

Counsel