Regardless of what the outcome might have been under that statute, defendants are clearly entitled to the benefit of the amended statute, which was enacted during the pendency of this appeal.

Therefore, it is unnecessary for us to address defendants' contentions regarding old section 593e.

Although defendants were originally prosecuted under the 1980 statute, the 1984 amendments to section 593e contain no saving clause which might preserve prosecutions initiated under old section 593e.

We granted a hearing after the decision of the Court of Appeal. The case was then certified to the Court of Appeal pursuant to rule 62 of the California Rules of Court. The appellate department of the superior court reversed, finding section 593e unconstitutionally vague and overbroad as applied to these defendants.

Following a court trial in Sacramento Municipal Court, defendants Babylon and Hyatt were found guilty of violating section 593e.

Rossi (1976) 18 Cal.3d 295 In re Estrada (1965) 63 Cal.2d 740 ), we conclude that the recent amendment requires reversal of the convictions.

Thus, pursuant to the general principle that, absent a saving clause, a criminal defendant is entitled to the benefit of a change in the law during the pendency of his appeal ( People v. During the pendency of this appeal, however, the Legislature amended section 593e, and - whatever may have been the case with respect to the 1980 legislation - it appears that the amended provision does not proscribe the activities of these defendants.

Originally this appeal confronted the courts with the challenge of interpreting and applying section 593e as enacted in 1980.

Babylon dictionary law