People v. CALVAREST

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that the felony manslaughter statute violated equal protection because it was not sufficiently distinguishable from the misdemeanor offense of criminally negligent homicide
• holding that the felony manslaughter statute violated equal protection because it was not sufficiently distinguishable from the misdemeanor offense of criminally negligent homicide
• holding that the felony manslaughter statute violated equal protection because it was not sufficiently distinguishable from the misdemeanor offense of criminally negligent homicide
• criminal statutes imposing different penalties for identical conduct irrationally discriminate against an accused in violation of equal protection
• \There must be substantial differences having a reasonable relationship to the persons involved and the public purpose to be achieved.\
• involuntary manslaughter statute held unconstitutional because no significant difference existed between the proof required for conviction of that crime and that required for conviction of criminally negligent homicide

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).