Flint

People v. Flint

Good Law
180 Cal. App. 3d 13·225 Cal. Rptr. 323
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaApril 21, 1986A027832California2,411 words

Opinion

Opinion

A jury found defendant Flint guilty of first degree "residential" burglary, and the trial court thereafter found that he had previously been convicted, September 29, 1975, of "a serious felony, to-wit: Burglary — 1st degree [of a residence], in violation of Section 459 of the Penal Code, within the meaning of Penal Code Sections 667 and 1192.7." He appeals from the judgment entered on the jury's verdict and the trial court's finding.

The judgment will be affirmed. Our reasons follow.

We consider the several appellate contentions in the order stated, and as framed, by Flint.

(1) It is argued that "there was no evidence presented at the preliminary examination [our italics] to connect appellant to the burglary."

No contention appears that at Flint's superior court trial there was not substantial evidence supportive of the jury's verdict of guilt.

Flint relies on the rule announced by People v. Elliot (1960) 54 Cal.2d 498, 503 [ 6 Cal. Rptr. 753 , 354 P.2d 225 ], holding, "[W]here it appears that, during the course of the preliminary examination, the defendant has been denied a substantial right, the commitment is unlawful within the meaning of section…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.