Logourl black
From our private database of 14,000+ case briefs...

People v. Mamaril

California Court of Appeal, Third District
2009 WL 1177057 (2009)


Facts

Murray Stanford (defendant) devised a plan from jail to sell rock cocaine with Rudy Mamaril (defendant) and Taneshia Carter, two friends who were not in jail. Stanford called Mamaril and Carter from jail and discussed matters using coded language, because the telephone calls were recorded. Carter was arrested on unrelated charges and agreed to testify against Mamaril and Stanford, who had been charged with conspiracy to sell rock cocaine. At trial, the state alleged that Mamaril and Stanford committed five overt acts in furtherance of the conspiracy, including the transport and sale of cocaine and the giving of orders by Stanford from jail. The state introduced numerous recorded telephone calls between Stanford, Mamaril, and Carter discussing the drug deals and containing coded language. Carter, a drug dealer familiar with the code words, translated the calls for the jury. The investigating officers testified that, based on training and experience, the phone calls between Stanford, Mamaril, and Carter related to drug transactions. The state also introduced a note from Mamaril to Stanford relating to the drug operation. The jury convicted Standford and Mamaril as charged. Stanford and Mamaril appealed, arguing that Carter’s uncorroborated accomplice testimony was unreliable and therefore insufficient to prove conspiracy to sell rock cocaine.

Rule of Law

The rule of law is the black letter law upon which the court rested its decision.

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

Issue

The issue section includes the dispositive legal issue in the case phrased as a question.

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

Holding and Reasoning (Raye, J.)

The holding and reasoning section includes:

  • A “yes” or “no” answer to the question framed in the issue section;
  • A summary of the majority or plurality opinion, using the CREAC method; and
  • The procedural disposition (e.g. reversed and remanded, affirmed, etc.).

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 97,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Vanderbilt, Berkeley, and the University of Illinois—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students. Read our student testimonials.

  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students. Read more about Quimbee.

Here's why 175,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 14,000 briefs, keyed to 188 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
  • The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
  • Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
  • Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.