Case law

People v. Vivar

11 Cal. 5th 510 · California Supreme Court · May 3, 2021

Graham (3d Cir. 1999) 169 F.3d 787, 792 [some misdemeanors can qualify as an aggravated felony under federal immigration law].) … What stands out most clearly from the record is that he was never properly advised of the role his immigration status would play either in assessing the attractiveness of his plea options or in his eligibility for a drug

Kuchel v. Harkness

39 Cal. 2d 309 · California Supreme Court · Jul 15, 1952

Harkness thereafter became the" duly appointed and qualified executor and has been substituted as appellant in this proceeding. … She wanted them established in business safely, and that is about all she told me about the deal.

Carney v. Simmonds

49 Cal. 2d 84 · California Supreme Court · Sep 17, 1957

These grounds clearly indicate that issues of law may be reexamined on a motion for a new trial. … While a more clearcut request for amendment could have been made, assuming one was necessary, we think it was sufficient and clearly there is a reasonable possibility (Lemoge Electric v.

Wiles v. State Personnel Board

19 Cal. 2d 344 · California Supreme Court · Feb 2, 1942

On August 13, 1938, after qualifying by examination, he was appointed to the permanent position. … But the letter, read in its entirety, clearly evidences the adjutant general's present intention on February 9th, within the probationary period, to discharge the petitioner.

People v. Homick

55 Cal. 4th 816 · California Supreme Court · Dec 3, 2012

Copitka’s testimony about defendant’s dominance in his relationship with his brother, established when both were children, was clearly relevant to Robert Homick’s defense that he carried out defendant’s instructions in the … She is not qualified to sit as a juror in a capital case.”

Carroll v. Abbott Laboratories, Inc.

32 Cal. 3d 892 · California Supreme Court · Dec 10, 1982

It does not seem to matter if the particular circumstances qualify as fraudulent or mistaken in the strict sense. [Citations.]” … However, since that decision was clearly within the equitable power of the court to make *905 under the facts of this case, the judgment must be affirmed regardless of the grounds actually relied upon. (See Munoz v.

George v. Bekins Van & Storage Co.

33 Cal. 2d 834 · California Supreme Court · May 13, 1949

By so doing they accepted defendant’s offer to store the goods at a rate based on the value clearly stated on the face of the receipt. … The amount billed was qualified by that valuation and had plaintiffs not agreed that the stipulated value was correct, defendant would have been at liberty to revise its charges for the first month.

People v. Carpenter

15 Cal. 4th 312 · California Supreme Court · Apr 28, 1997

Purnell testified under a grant of immunity that she bought it at defendant’s request and gave it to him. He paid for it. … Defendant’s statement, “I want to rape you,” clearly established his intent, which was also indicated by evidence that on two other occasions, one earlier and one later, he did in fact rape.

People v. Vieira

25 Cal. Rptr. 3d 337 · California Supreme Court · May 26, 2005

effects associated with death-qualifying voir dire in open court had not been shown to be actual but only potential.” … Defense counsel offered Cemy’s testimony to establish that defendant, under the mind control techniques of Cmz, was unable to form the mental state required for first degree murder.

People v. Fleming

166 Cal. 357 · California Supreme Court · Nov 1, 1913

We have not set forth the foregoing in regard to the evidence for the purpose of establishing that it is not technically sufficient to support a verdict of guilty, for under our well established rule such a conclusion cannot … QUALIFIED CONCURRENCE OF THE CHIEF JUSTICE.

Kofoed v. Gordon

122 Cal. 314 · California Supreme Court · Nov 16, 1898

to the subject of tender together, it is evident that the intention of the legislature was to do away with many of the objections by which rights dependent upon offer of performance had been theretofore defeated, and to establish … But it has been held by this court that when a qualified redemptioner makes an attempt in good faith to redeem within the proper time, and is only prevented from perfecting a valid redemption hy an innocent mistake, equity

People v. McKinnon

52 Cal. 4th 610 · California Supreme Court · Aug 22, 2011

Similarly, the record as a whole clearly established that Prospective Juror J.S. was disqualified from service under Witt . … Defense counsel objected on the ground the statement did not qualify under the exception.

People v. Bittaker

48 Cal. 3d 1046 · California Supreme Court · Jun 22, 1989

Limitation on death-qualifying voir dire. Concerned about the implications of our discussion in Hovey v. … The prosecutor’s comment, however, is clearly improper for another reason. It is not the function of the jury to “appeal proof’ its verdict.

Boone v. Kingsbury

206 Cal. 148 · California Supreme Court · Dec 31, 1928

This last objection being clearly inescapable, it is not necessary to discuss the first ground of objection. … They become a part of it and qualify it so that the estate granted is limited to the permitted uses." ( Forestier v. Johnson, 164 Cal. 24 [ 127 P. 156 ].)

People v. Laudermilk

67 Cal. 2d 272 · California Supreme Court · Sep 12, 1967

established its inadequacy to raise such doubt. … To do so would be not merely to defeat the purpose of expert opinion evidence but to discard such evidence for mere psychiatric speculation clearly outside our province.

People v. McClellan

71 Cal. 2d 793 · California Supreme Court · Aug 20, 1969

Misconduct in this connection, if there was any, seems clearly prejudicial. The admonition of the trial court could not wipe away the obvious implication that defendant had committed 30 robberies. … Cross-examination, which is limited to “[matters] within the scope of the direct examination” [here the Gaslight robbery] by Evidence Code, section 773, “may be directed to. the eliciting of any matter which may tend to overcome or qualify

Randone v. Appellate Department

5 Cal. 3d 536 · California Supreme Court · Aug 26, 1971

Hoke (1894) 101 Cal. 131, 133 [ 35 P. 562 ] (establishment of reclamation district); Sokol v. … Administrator (1941) 312 U.S. 126, 152-153 [ 85 L.Ed. 624, 639-640 , 61 S.Ct. 524 ] (establishment of industry-wide minimum wage); Goldsmith v.

City & County of San Francisco v. Superior Court

53 Cal. 2d 236 · California Supreme Court · Dec 14, 1959

In the circumstances the superior court clearly exceeds its jurisdiction when it undertakes to require the board to set aside its decision. … That this view was the basis of the commission’s action is established by the pleadings.

Basch v. Bank of Am. Nat'l Tr. & Sav. Ass'n

22 Cal. 2d 316 · California Supreme Court · Jun 16, 1943

its own diligence, a bank’s only protection against forgeries by a confidential agent to whom settlement of the bank account has been delegated is verification of statements by the depositor himself, who in such case is clearly … Without detailing the evidence bearing on these initial points, it will suffice to state that the undisputed testimony of qualified witnesses on the subject shows that the bank’s system of examining checks for irregularities

Corwin v. Los Angeles Newspaper Service Bureau, Inc.

22 Cal. 3d 302 · California Supreme Court · Sep 26, 1978

The Bureau works with the advertiser to make sure a notice is properly phrased in accordance with applicable statutes and to ascertain which newspapers are qualified to carry the particular advertisement. … The undisputed findings of the trial judge clearly establish that neither paragraph Second nor Eighth constitutes an unreasonable restraint of trade. 1.