Guillen

People v. Guillen

Good Law
1994 Cal. App. LEXIS 569·25 Cal. App. 4th 756·31 Cal. Rptr. 2d 653·31 Cal. Rptr. 653·94 Daily Journal DAR 7797
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJune 6, 1994B073647California2,660 words

Opinion

Opinion

Epstein, J.

In this case we consider whether double jeopardy and Penal Code section 1157 bar retrial of a large quantity enhancement when a defendant is found guilty of possession for sale but the jury is unable to reach a verdict on the enhancement. We conclude that retrial is proper under these circumstances. We modify the judgment to correct a credit miscalculation, and affirm the judgment as modified.

Factual and Procedural Summary

During surveillance of a residence at 750 Broadway in Venice on April 16, 1991, Los Angeles Police Detective Anthony Manente observed appellant Javier Guillen exit the front door carrying a cellular phone and a black leather pouch. Appellant walked out to the sidewalk. After a few minutes, a man walked up to appellant and the two engaged in conversation. The man who had approached appellant reached into his pocket and handed some money to appellant. Appellant reached into the black leather pouch, removed something and handed it to the man. Appellant put the money in his pocket and the man left.

On April 23, 1991, Detective Manente and other officers returned to the address with a search warrant. They watched as appellant walked through a gate…

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.