Schulz

People v. Schulz

Good Law
5 Cal. App. 4th 563·7 Cal. Rptr. 2d 269
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMarch 31, 1992Docket Nos. D013329, D013364California3,523 words

Opinion

Opinion

Work, J.

Nicholas Kenneth Schulz appeals separate judgments convicting him of attempted murder (Pen. Code, §§ 187, 664), while personally using a firearm (§ 12022.5) and personally inflicting great bodily injury (§ 12022.7); possessing a flammable or explosive device (§ 453, subd. (a)); and possessing a firebomb (§ 453, subd. (b)). Schulz’s convictions arise from two trials, during which he represented himself. At the first trial, the jury hung on the great bodily injury enhancement, and Schulz was sentenced to eleven years, eight months. The second trial involved only the great bodily injury enhancement which this time was found true. After this finding, the trial court resentenced Schulz—staying the two-year sentence on the firearm use enhancement and imposing the three-year sentence on the great bodily injury enhancement, for a total sentence of twelve years, eight months. By petition for writ of habeas corpus, Schulz raises jurisdictional issues identical to those raised in his appeal from case No. D013364.

Regarding the first trial resulting in the attempted murder conviction, Schulz contends the trial court: (1) erroneously excluded evidence the victim was a commercial…

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.