# People v. Bennett

> California Supreme Court · February 2, 1998 · 17 Cal. 4th 373

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9558337

## Case

- **Full name:** The PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. EDWIN WINSLOW BENNETT, Defendant and Appellant. in Re EDWIN WINSLOW BENNETT on Habeas Corpus
- **Court:** California Supreme Court
- **Decided:** February 2, 1998
- **Citations:** 17 Cal. 4th 373; 98 Daily Journal DAR 1155; 70 Cal. Rptr. 2d 850; 949 P.2d 947; 98 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 863; 1998 Cal. LEXIS 28
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Concurrence by Werdegar
- **Judges:** Kennard, Brown
- **Cited by:** 59 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9558337

## Opinion text

*393 WERDEGAR, J.
I concur in the majority opinion. I agree, as the majority states, that Segura v. United States (1984) 468 U.S. 796 [ 104 S.Ct. 3380 , 82 L.Ed.2d 599 ] is dispositive. Because Segura is dispositive, the majority’s discussion of the further question, whether an 18-hour seizure of defendant’s motel room, based only on reasonable suspicion, was a violation of the Fourth Amendment, is unnecessary. Principles of judicial restraint counsel that we not reach out. to decide gratuitously constitutional questions of first impression. Sound jurisprudence dictates that such issues be decided only in the context of cases and controversies actually raising the issue. I would await such a case.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9558337. Public record. Not legal advice.