California Supreme Court· 2/24/1978
People v. Sewell
Citations
- 574 P.2d 1231
- 20 Cal. 3d 639
- 143 Cal. Rptr. 879
- 1978 Cal. LEXIS 192
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- statute that required multiple life terms merge into a single life term means the terms run concurrently but still remain separate sentences
- statute that required multiple life terms merge into a single life term means the terms run concurrently but still remain separate sentences
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: Richardson
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
19 cases in this archive cite this case.
- People v. HardyCalifornia Supreme Court· 1992-03-12· cited 507×
- People v. MemroCalifornia Supreme Court· 1985-06-06· cited 247×
- People v. ReberCalifornia Court of Appeal· 1986-02-11· cited 73×
- People v. HusteadCalifornia Court of Appeal· 1999-08-20· cited 64×
- Oliveros v. County of Los AngelesCalifornia Court of Appeal· 2004-07-28· cited 64×
- People v. GulbrandsenCalifornia Court of Appeal· 1989-05-02· cited 49×
- People v. GoodallCalifornia Court of Appeal· 1982-04-26· cited 36×
- People v. CoyerCalifornia Court of Appeal· 1983-05-10· cited 33×
- People v. ClaxtonCalifornia Court of Appeal· 1982-03-02· cited 28×
- People v. FainCalifornia Supreme Court· 1983-08-18· cited 27×
- Holkesvig v. WelteNorth Dakota Supreme Court· 2011-08-18· cited 17×
- People v. HarrisCalifornia Court of Appeal· 1985-03-06· cited 14×
- People v. McKinneyCalifornia Court of Appeal· 1979-08-01· cited 14×
- People v. CaldwellCalifornia Court of Appeal· 1980-02-22· cited 12×
- People v. WillisCalifornia Court of Appeal· 1980-04-10· cited 12×
- Mendibles v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal· 1984-12-20· cited 8×
- People v. FosterCalifornia Court of Appeal· 1981-01-07· cited 6×
- Bianchi v. BlodgettNinth Circuit· 1991-01-31· cited 5×
- State v. ClarkNorth Dakota Supreme Court· 2011-08-18· cited 3×
Cites
9 cases in this archive are cited by this case.
- People v. ReyesCalifornia Supreme Court· 1974-09-17· cited 163×
- People v. WalkerCalifornia Supreme Court· 1976-10-25· cited 133×
- In Re WatsonCalifornia Supreme Court· 1977-07-15· cited 52×
- In Re PattersonCalifornia Supreme Court· 1966-03-17· cited 50×
- In Re StolikerCalifornia Supreme Court· 1957-09-13· cited 45×
- People v. HolmanCalifornia Court of Appeal· 1945-12-07· cited 45×
- In Re RyeCalifornia Court of Appeal· 1957-07-17· cited 17×
- In Re SatterfieldCalifornia Supreme Court· 1966-04-12· cited 15×
- In Re GullattCalifornia Supreme Court· 1968-10-03· cited 12×
Other cases named People v. Sewell
15 other CourtListener records share this case name.
- People v. SewellCalifornia Court of Appeal· 2000-05-04· cited 21×
- People v. SewellCalifornia Court of Appeal· 1970-01-29· cited 17×
- People v. SewellCalifornia Court of Appeal· 1950-02-02· cited 8×
- People v. SewellCalifornia Court of Appeal· 1989-05-30· cited 5×
- People v. SewellMichigan Supreme Court· 2006-07-31
- People v. SewellAppellate Court of Illinois· 2003-12-31
- People v. SewellAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York· 2019-04-26
- People v. SewellAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York· 1910-05-15
- People v. SewellNew York County Courts· 1907-10-15
- People v. SewellAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York· 1958-07-09
- People v. SewellAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York· 1960-04-07
- People v. SewellAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York· 2013-10-30
- People v. SewellAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York· 2013-10-30
- People v. SewellAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York· 1999-10-12
- People v. SewellAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York· 2026-03-04
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.