Court Opinion

ID: 9633721
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-22 11:58:08.678987+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T14:55:55.042455
License: Public Domain

BAXTER,J.
—I concur in the judgment. I think it necessary, however, to point out that defendant Trotter failed to petition for review of the Court of Appeal decision or to join in the petition for review filed by defendant Harris. Rule 28(b) of the California Rules of Court clearly provides that, “A party seeking review must serve and file a petition . . . .” (Italics added.) Defendant Trotter’s failure to do so raises the question of whether he is properly before this court. As a practical matter, we need not decide that question in light of our affirmance of the Court of Appeal decision against defendant Trotter. I believe a word of caution, however, is advisable. In future cases, each party who seeks our review should comply with rule 28(b) either by filing a petition for review or by filing an express written joinder in another party’s petition.