California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from People v. Santamaria, 35 Cal.Rptr.2d 624, 8 Cal.4th 903, 884 P.2d 81 (Cal. 1994):
The result of Pettaway v. Plummer, supra, 943 F.2d 1041, unduly hampers prosecution of crimes involving weapons. A jury convinced that the defendant is guilty, although uncertain as to the precise role he or she played, may validly convict of the crime and simultaneously find a weapon enhancement not true; but if for any reason the judgment is reversed on appeal, retrial might be rendered effectively impossible, or at least very difficult, under that decision. Thus, charging weapon enhancements becomes risky. Here, for example, the jury found defendant guilty of murder with special circumstances. Now, because of the relatively insignificant enhancement allegation and the intervening appellate reversal, the charges have been dismissed. Defendant will go free if that dismissal stands, despite the evidence that convinced the first jury that he was, in fact, guilty as either the actual killer or an aider and abettor.
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.