# People v. Cox

> California Supreme Court · June 9, 2003 · 135 Cal. Rptr. 2d 272

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9797868

## Case

- **Full name:** The PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. MICHAEL ANTHONY COX, Defendant and Appellant
- **Court:** California Supreme Court
- **Decided:** June 9, 2003
- **Citations:** 135 Cal. Rptr. 2d 272; 30 Cal. 4th 916; 2003 Daily Journal DAR 6165; 70 P.3d 277; 2003 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 4892; 2003 Cal. LEXIS 3519
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Dissent by Kennard
- **Judges:** Moreno, Kennard
- **Cited by:** 210 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- **Red flag:** Disapproved on other grounds by People v. Doolin, 45 Cal. 4th 390 (2009).
- Negative treatments: 1
- Distinguished by: 0
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9797868

## How later opinions describe it (automated extraction)

- stating that a single improper question asked by the prosecutor was not prejudicial because it was not part of “a pattern of conduct”

## Opinion text

KENNARD, J., Dissenting.
Because I would grant defendant’s petition for writ of habeas corpus in the companion case of In re Cox (2003) 30 Cal.4th 974 [ 135 Cal.Rptr.2d 315 , 70 P.3d 313 ], I would dismiss this automatic appeal as moot.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9797868. Public record. Not legal advice.