# People v. May

> California Supreme Court · February 1, 1988 · 44 Cal. 3d 309

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9633689

## Case

- **Full name:** The PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. MICHAEL DENNIS MAY, Defendant and Appellant
- **Court:** California Supreme Court
- **Decided:** February 1, 1988
- **Citations:** 44 Cal. 3d 309; 243 Cal. Rptr. 369; 748 P.2d 307; 1988 Cal. LEXIS 20
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Concurrence by Eagleson
- **Judges:** Lucas, Eagleson, Mosk
- **Cited by:** 97 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9633689

## How later opinions describe it (automated extraction)

- explaining that California voters’ adoption of constitutional amendment ‘‘to dispense with exclusionary rules derived solely from the state [c]onstitution’’ rendered it ‘‘not reasonably likely that [they] intended to preserve, in the form of a statutory privilege, a judicially…

## Opinion text

EAGLESON, J.
I concur in the judgment and in the majority’s holding that Disbrow has been abrogated by Proposition 8. However, I do not agree that Ramona R. was a decision that did no more than define the scope of the right against self-incrimination, since it clearly created a remedial exclusionary rule.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9633689. Public record. Not legal advice.