California v. Hartland
Annotate this CaseMark Hartland was convicted by jury of one count each of kidnapping, assault by means likely to produce great bodily injury, and domestic violence resulting in a traumatic condition. In a bifurcated proceeding, the trial court found a prior conviction allegation true as both a prior strike, ad a prior serious felony. Hartland received a 21 year sentence in state prison. Relying on California v. Oliver, 55 Cal.2d 761 (1961) and In re Michele D.,29 Cal.4th 600 (2002), Hartland argued the trial court prejudicially erred by failing to instruct the jury that if the kidnapping victim was so intoxicated as to lack the capacity to consent, then Hartland could not be found guilty of kidnapping unless he acted with illegal purpose or illegal intent. In the published portion of its opinion, the Court of Appeal rejected Hartland’s argument because the Court declined to extend the doctrine of Oliver and Michele D. to the kidnapping of an intoxicated, resisting, adult victim. In the unpublished portion of its opinion, the Court addressed issues concerning sentencing and custody credits. The matter was remanded for the trial court to exercise its newly gained discretion to dismiss or strike the prior serious felony conviction. Furthermore, the Court ordered the correction of clerical errors in the abstract of judgment and the sentencing minute order. Otherwise, judgment was affirmed.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.