People v. Gonzales

California Supreme Court Feb 15, 2017 No. S240044Published

AI Brief

AI-generated · verify before citing

Holding. The court ordered review to determine if Penal Code section 473, subdivision (b) is ambiguous regarding the identity theft exception and whether voter materials clarify if an identity theft conviction must be transactionally related to a forgery count to preclude misdemeanor treatment.

Issues

Is Penal Code section 473, subdivision (b), as amended by Proposition 47, ambiguous as to the manner in which the 'identity theft exception' applies?
Do the voter materials make clear that the identity theft conviction must be transactionally related to the forgery count(s) in order to exclude forgery from misdemeanor treatment under section 473, subdivision (b)?

Disposition. Review ordered

Quotations verified verbatim against the opinion

“Is Penal Code section 473, subdivision (b), as amended by Proposition 47, ambiguous as to the manner in which the "identity theft exception" applies?”

“do the voter materials make clear that the identity theft conviction must be transactionally related to the forgery count(s) in order to exclude forgery from misdemeanor treatment under section 473, subdivision (b) ?”

Review is ordered on the court's own motion. The issue to be briefed and argued is limited to the following: Is Penal Code section 473, subdivision (b), as amended by Proposition 47, ambiguous as to the manner in which the "identity theft exception" applies? If so, do the voter materials make clear that the identity theft conviction must be transactionally related to the forgery count(s) in order to exclude forgery from misdemeanor treatment under section 473, subdivision (b) ?

People v. Gonzales

AI Brief

More from California Supreme Court

Related research

AI Brief