Molina

People v. Molina

Good Law
1992 Cal. App. LEXIS 473·5 Cal. App. 4th 221·6 Cal. Rptr. 2d 736·92 Daily Journal DAR 4754·92 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 3025
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaApril 7, 1992B056088California4,779 words

Opinion

Opinion

Ortega, J.

Alan Manuelas Molina appeals from the judgment (order granting probation) entered after his conviction by the court of perjury. (Pen. Code, former § 118, now § 118, subd. (a), the perjury case.) Molina also appeals from the court’s finding that he violated the “obey ail laws” condition of probation previously imposed after his negotiated guilty plea to grand theft and two counts of forgery. (§ 487, subd. 1; former § 470, now § 470, subd. (a), the grand theft case.)

In the perjury case, Molina submitted a knowingly false driver’s license application under oath to the Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV). We reject Molina’s contention that because his criminal conduct was more specifically proscribed by Vehicle Code section 20’s misdemeanor prohibition on making false statements in documents filed with DMV, he can be prosecuted only for that misdemeanor and not for perjury, a felony. At the probation violation hearing in the grand theft case, the trial court found that Molina violated his probation by possessing a fraudulently obtained driver’s license (Veh. Code, former § 14610, subd. (a), now § 14610, subd. (a)(1)). We reject Molina’s contentions that that section requires…

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.