![People v. Ceja](/assets/artwork/1x1-42817eea7ade52607a760cbee00d1495.gif)
![People v. Ceja](/assets/artwork/1x1-42817eea7ade52607a760cbee00d1495.gif)
![](/assets/artwork/1x1-42817eea7ade52607a760cbee00d1495.gif)
![](/assets/artwork/1x1-42817eea7ade52607a760cbee00d1495.gif)
People v. Ceja
229 P.3D 995, 108 CAL.RPTR.3D 568, 49 CAL.4TH 1, 2010 DAILY JOURNAL D.A.R. 7083, 10 CAL. DAILY OP. SERV. 5943, 2010.CA.0005717
-
- 0,99 €
-
- 0,99 €
Descrição da editora
The Penal Code specifies that a defendant may not be convicted of stealing and receiving the same property. (Pen. Code, 496, subd. (a).) In this case, the trial court failed to instruct on this point, and the jury convicted defendant of both petty theft and receiving the property he had stolen. A divided Court of Appeal reversed the petty theft conviction. The majority reasoned that the "greater" felony offense of receiving stolen property took precedence over the "lesser" misdemeanor theft offense.