People v. Aguirre

4 Citing cases

  1. People v. Mountford

    No. B287245 (Cal. Ct. App. May. 28, 2019)   Cited 3 times

    If the forgery does not involve one of the seven instruments specified in section 473, subdivision (b), it is a wobbler under subdivision (a) of section 473." (Id. at p. 241; accord, People v. Aguirre (2018) 21 Cal.App.5th 429, 433; People v. Bloomfield (2017) 13 Cal.App.5th 647, 652-653; see, e.g., People v. Gollardo (2017) 17 Cal.App.5th 547 [forging a prescription for narcotics not included in Proposition 47].) A receipt for goods was "not one of the seven instruments specified in section 473, subdivision (b)."

  2. People v. Worlds

    E070459 (Cal. Ct. App. Jun. 5, 2019)

    [Citations.]" (People v. Colbert, supra, 6 Cal.5th at p. 602.) A court errs in aggregating the amounts of multiple forged checks for purposes of denying a defendant relief pursuant to section 1170.18. (People v. Salmorin (2016) 1 Cal.App.5th 738, 745-754 [defendant convicted of one count of forgery of multiple checks, none of which individually exceeded $950, but in the aggregate were valued at more than $950]; People v. Hoffman (2015) 241 Cal.App.4th 1304, 1310 [court erred in aggregating amounts of checks in case in which defendant pled guilty to seven counts of forgery where no individual check on any individual count exceeded $950]; but see People v. Aguirre (2018) 21 Cal.App.5th 429, 431 [aggregation of numerous forged bills valued at $1,130, none of which were valued individually at more than $950, permissible when denying defendant's § 1170.18 petition].) Here, it appears from the police report that the checks defendant passed which constituted the offense(s) alleged in count 1 were in the amounts of $540.70, $530.17, and $520.70, all passed at Guaranty Bank between October 4 and 9, 2001, for a total value of $1,591.57.

  3. People v. Rodriguez

    No. D071948 (Cal. Ct. App. Sep. 19, 2018)   Cited 2 times

    On the contrary, a requirement that the prosecution prove lack of authority in a case involving forged seals or handwriting " ' "is in accord with the essence of forgery, which is making or passing a false document." ' " (People v. Aguirre (2018) 21 Cal.App.5th 429, 436; see People v. McKenna (1938) 11 Cal.2d 327, 332 ["The crime of forgery consists either in the false making or alteration of a document without authority or the uttering (making use) of such a document with the intent to defraud."].) Further, the People have pointed us to no judicial authority supporting their argument.

  4. People v. Long

    No. C076292 (Cal. Ct. App. Jul. 20, 2018)

    We see no impediment to considering the total of both checks under the single count for violating section 475, subdivision (b), possession of an unfinished check. People v. Aguirre (2018) 21 Cal.App.5th 429 (Aguirre) -- petition for review denied June 27, 2018, S248453 -- held that insofar as possession of counterfeit currency with intent to circulate (§ 476) was concerned, whether the crime remains a wobbler following passage of Proposition 47 or whether it must be charged and sentenced as a misdemeanor is determined by the total value of the counterfeit currency possessed by the defendant, not by the single highest denomination bill found in the defendant's possession (which would never yield a felony). (Id. at p. 435, fn. 3 [highest denomination for paper currency is $100].)