Challenging Jury Findings California

Summary

Challenging premeditation and deliberation findings in California involves using Penal Code Sections 1181 and 1473, which allow for new trials or relief if false evidence is discovered or used. Case law, such as People v. Lewin, can provide precedence. Inadequate representation at sentencing may include failure to present mitigating evidence or ineffective communication. Consulting a local attorney specializing in criminal defense is advisable for personalized guidance.

Full Conversation

In california, how can I challenge or strike the premeditation and deliberation findings by a jury in an attempted murder case when new evidence or false testimony is presented?
In California, challenging or striking findings like premeditation and deliberation in an attempted murder case can be done through:
- California Penal Code Section *: Allows for a new trial if false evidence is discovered.
- California Penal Code Section *: Provides relief if false evidence was used at trial.
- Case Law: Look into cases like People v. Lewin for precedence.
It might be beneficial to consult with a legal professional who specializes in these matters for detailed guidance.
What are examples of inadequate representation at sentencing in california?
Inadequate representation at sentencing in California might include:
- Failure to present mitigating evidence.
- Ineffective communication with the defendant.
- Lack of preparation for sentencing hearings.
- Not challenging incorrect sentencing guidelines.
- Failure to address or correct errors in pre-sentencing reports.
For more detailed assistance, you might want to consult a local attorney.