The PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. Leland WONG, Defendant and Appellant.
Decided: July 28, 2010
Jonathan P. Milberg for Defendant and Appellant. Edmund G. Brown, Jr., Attorney General, Dane R. Gillette, Chief Assistant Attorney General, Pamela C. Hamanaka, Assistant Attorney General, Scott A. Taryle and Michael C. Keller, Deputy Attorneys General, for Plaintiff and Respondent.
The story of Leland Wong (Wong) is one of graft and hubris. Wrongly believing he could get away with lying, cheating and stealing, he ended up convicted of multiple crimes, including embezzling money (Pen.Code, § 487, subd. (a)),1 accepting a bribe (§ 68); acting with a conflict of interest (Gov.Code, § 1090); and committing perjury (§ 118). He appeals and assigns error on the theory that the embezzlement convictions are barred by the statute of limitations, and the bribery, conflict of interest and perjury convictions are not supported by sufficient evidence. Among other questions presented by this appeal is the following: Is it legal for a commissioner in one city department to take money from a third party to influence contract negotiations with a different department in the same city? The answer is no. After review, we conclude that the challenged convictions must stand.
Please read more at: https://caselaw.findlaw.com/ca-court-of-appeal/1533260.html