Skip to main content
· 6/5/2002

People v. Marchand

Citations

  • 120 Cal. Rptr. 2d 687
  • 98 Cal. App. 4th 1056
  • 2002 Daily Journal DAR 6245
  • 2002 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 4937
  • 2002 Cal. App. LEXIS 4215

How courts have described this case

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

  • “it does not appear defendant here is subject to the public notification provisions of the sex offender registration statutes.... Thus, we need not address defendant’s argument that sex offender registration constitutes punishment because it ‘obviously carries substantial societal stigma.’ ”
  • “Defendant fails to explain why these two factors, which a majority of our Supreme Court found dispositive in the ex post facto context, are not similarly dispositive in determining whether registration constitutes punishment for purposes of the due process clause under Apprendi.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Raye

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.