Gonzalez

People v. Gonzalez

Good Law
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMarch 3, 2022E073987California2,503 words

Opinion

Opinion

FACTS

Because this case involves a facial challenge to the constitutionality of a statute,

the underlying facts of Gonzalez’s crime are not relevant. (See Tobe v. City of Santa Ana

(1995) 9 Cal.4th 1069, 1084 (Tobe) [“A facial challenge to the constitutional validity of a

statute or ordinance considers only the text of the measure itself, not its application to the

particular circumstances of an individual”].) For our purposes, it suffices to say Gonzalez

was caught parked on the side of the road with about .6 grams of methamphetamine and a

Unlabeled statutory citations refer to the Health and Safety Code.

2 loaded, operable firearm. He was convicted of three firearm-related crimes (including the

violation of section 11370.1 at issue here) and sentenced to six years in prison.

II

ANALYSIS

Section 11370.1 makes it a felony to possess certain controlled substances “while

armed with a loaded, operable firearm.” (§ 11370.1, subd. (a).) Gonzalez argues this

provision impermissibly infringes on the Second Amendment right to bear arms because

it targets nonviolent criminals—i.e., those in possession of controlled substances. To pass

constitutional scrutiny, Gonzalez…

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.