California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from People v. A.P. (In re A.P.), 2d Juv. No. B286019 (Cal. App. 2019):
"Our primary task in interpreting the statute is to determine the lawmakers' intent. [Citation.] We begin with the words of the statute and their usual and ordinary meaning, which would typically be their dictionary definition. [Citations.] Their plain meaning controls, unless the words are ambiguous. [Citation.] 'If the statute is ambiguous, we may consider a variety of extrinsic aids, including legislative history, the statute's purpose, and public policy.' [Citation.]" (People v. Costella (2017) 11 Cal.App.5th 1, 5-6, italics added.) "Where the words of the statute are clear, we may not add to or alter them to accomplish a purpose that does not appear on the face of the
Page 6
statute or from its legislative history." (Burden v. Snowden (1992) 2 Cal.4th 556, 562.)
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.