People v. Picon

How courts have described this case

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

• explaining that this court “giv[es] each word or phrase in a statute a distinct . . . meaning”
• explaining that the rule against surplusage “favors giving each word or phrase in a statute a distinct, not an identical, meaning”
• explaining that the rule against surplusage “favors giving each word or phrase in a statute a distinct, not an identical, meaning”
• explaining that the rule against surplusage “favors giving each word or phrase in a statute a distinct, not an identical, meaning”
• concluding that multiple and conflicting dictionary definitions were “nondefinitive”
• concluding that multiple and conflicting dictionary definitions were “nondefinitive”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).