Case law

People v. Becerrada

216 Cal. Rptr. 3d 662 · California Supreme Court · Apr 17, 2017

It‟s clearly relevant. … It clearly, and reasonably, rejected any eruption in anger claim.

People v. Carpenter

90 Cal. Rptr. 2d 607 · California Supreme Court · Nov 29, 1999

Defendant has a right to jurors who are qualified and competent, not to any particular juror.” (People v. Holt, supra, 15 Cal.4th at p. 656.) The actual jurors of this case were qualified and competent. … Using a “death-qualified” jury is permissible. (Id. at p. 402.)

Estate of Griswold

108 Cal. Rptr. 2d 165 · California Supreme Court · Jun 21, 2001

Since no evidence of a contrary intent clearly appears, we may reasonably infer that the types of acknowledgement formerly deemed sufficient for the legitimation statute (and former section 255, as well) suffice for purposes … We may not, under the guise of interpretation, insert qualifying provisions not included in the statute. ( California Fed. Savings & Loan Assn. v.

Fewel & Dawes, Inc. v. Pratt

17 Cal. 2d 85 · California Supreme Court · Jan 27, 1941

The assignment clearly states that the contract was between Fewel as an individual and Pratt. … Appellant sought to introduce that final judgment as evidence in this case to establish it as res adjudicata and to create an estoppel.

International Business Machines v. State Board of Equalization

26 Cal. 3d 923 · California Supreme Court · Apr 17, 1980

The Board maintains that under section 6391 the renewal after August 1, 1965, of a prior lease clearly renders the receipts taxable. … It is, however, “an established rule of statutory construction that similar statutes should be construed in light of one another ... .

People v. Barker

18 Cal. Rptr. 3d 260 · California Supreme Court · Aug 30, 2004

"A person convicted of a qualifying crime is required to register for the rest of his life. (290, subd. (a)(1)(A).) … (b) [listing crimes qualifying as strikes], 1192.7, subd.

People Ex Rel. Harris v. Pac Anchor Transportation, Inc.

59 Cal. 4th 772 · California Supreme Court · Jul 28, 2014

Paragraph (3) deals with “Continuation” of “State standard transportation practices,” such as “uniform bills of lading or receipts” and “antitrust immunity for joint line rates . . . .” … Morales, Wolens, Rowe, and Dan’s City each establish when a claim is expressly preempted. (See, e.g., Tanen v. Southwest Airlines Co. (2010) 187 Cal.App.4th 1156, 1166-1167.)

In Re Dannenberg

23 Cal. Rptr. 3d 417 · California Supreme Court · Jan 24, 2005

Section 3041 sought “for the first time [to establish] specific procedures ... for parole consideration” for these offenders. … The panel then clearly articulated its reasons, described above, for concluding that the evidence indicated an “especially callous and cruel” murder.

Konig v. Fair Employment and Housing Commission

123 Cal. Rptr. 2d 1 · California Supreme Court · Jul 29, 2002

The most disturbing aspect of this case is not that the court should cede constitutional ground with such alacrity; its willingness to do so is by now well established. (See Obrien v. … Not only are administrative agencies not immune to political influences, they are subject to capture by a specialized constituency.

Olympic and Ga. Partners, LLC v. County of L.A.

California Supreme Court · Aug 28, 2025

It is well established that “fair market value . . . equals the sum total of interests in the property.” … I’ll turn next to the key money payments — which, in my view, fall even more clearly on the “business” side of the Elk Hills line.

San Joaquin & Kings River Canal & Irrigation Co. v. Worswick

187 Cal. 674 · California Supreme Court · Jan 4, 1922

The nature of the water rights intended to be recognized and protected by the said acts of Congress are there clearly described by Justice McFarland. … It provides for the sale of desert lands in amounts not exceeding one section to any qualified person who declares on oath that he intends to reclaim such desert land by conducting water upon the same within three years thereafter

People v. Heishman

45 Cal. 3d 147 · California Supreme Court · May 9, 1988

Clearly, such an instruction would not have made a difference. … The evidence clearly established convictions of defendant for only one of those crimes, the rape of Patrice S. Defendant contends, on various grounds, that it was reversible error to admit evidence of the other four.

People v. McDaniel

16 Cal. 3d 156 · California Supreme Court · Feb 11, 1976

An investigator, qualified as an expert witness, testified that an explosive charge had been placed inside the screen door and triggered with a pull-type device attached to the door. … Price is clearly distinguishable.

Bours v. Zachariah

11 Cal. 281 · California Supreme Court · Jul 1, 1858

That cer *292 tificate is evidence for certain purposes ; but what would be the effect if several certificates were allowed, some qualifying or contradicting the rest, might not be so easy to determine. … If the acknowledgment can be established by the examination of the officer as a witness, years after the transaction, it may be established by the testimony of any other credible witness who may have knowledge of it, and

Partee v. San Diego Chargers Football Co.

34 Cal. 3d 378 · California Supreme Court · Aug 29, 1983

I find it ironic that this court today holds that professional football — for which Congress has not declared a national uniform policy — is immune from state regulation. … Clearly, this state's antitrust law is nondiscriminating.

In Re Bower

38 Cal. 3d 865 · California Supreme Court · Jun 24, 1985

It is equally well established, however, that when reference to matters outside the record is necessary to establish that a defendant has been denied a fundamental constitutional right resort to habeas corpus is not only … The majority fails to explain why the mistrial order itself fails to qualify as the requisite "new fact or circumstance" leading to the prosecutor's reevaluation of his case.

Ballard v. Superior Court of San Diego County

64 Cal. 2d 159 · California Supreme Court · Feb 15, 1966

Our instant review of the trial court’s ruling as to the suppression of the statements would clearly be both premature and impermissible. II. … Professor Wigmore, in a widely quoted passage, stated, “No judge should ever let a sex-offense charge go to the jury unless the female complainant’s social history and mental makeup have been examined and testified to by a qualified

People v. Williams

29 Cal. 3d 392 · California Supreme Court · Jun 1, 1981

508 P.2d 300 ]), further interrogation may reveal bias of which he is unaware or which, because of his impaired objectivity, he unreasonably believes he can overcome. 3 And although his protestations of impartiality may immunize … The last-cited case makes the following trenchant observation: “‘The right to examine prospective jurors on their voir dire is granted to litigants in order to enable them to select a jury composed of men and women qualified

People v. Johnson

1 Cal. Rptr. 3d 1 · California Supreme Court · May 3, 2004

Finally, Stanley established a bright-line rule that the exclusion of every member of defendant’s racial group established a prima facie case. (Stanley, at p. 1284.) … The specific facts and actions the plaintiff must prove to establish a prima facie case of discriminatory purpose under McDonnell Douglas are: “(i) that he belongs to a racial minority; (ii) that he applied and was qualified

Tapia v. Superior Court

53 Cal. 3d 282 · California Supreme Court · Apr 1, 1991

For some types of laws, the test which Tapia proposes is clearly appropriate. … The third category of new provisions consists of those which clearly benefit only defendants.