Case law

People v. Bertsch and Hronis

California Supreme Court · Apr 20, 2026

Presley clearly understood RFLP DNA testing and demonstrated a familiarity with the procedures used in this case to implement the technique. … He was qualified to testify regarding the correctness of the scientific procedures followed by the FBI in conducting that analysis.

Catholic Mutual Relief Society v. Superior Court

64 Cal. Rptr. 3d 434 · California Supreme Court · Aug 27, 2007

The term “any insurance carrier” in section 2017.210 is qualified by the circumstance that the carrier “may be liable to satisfy in whole or in part a judgment that may be entered in the action.” (§ 2017.210.) … “In a fronting arrangement—a well-established and perfectly legal scheme—policies are issued by a state licensed insurance company and then immediately reinsured 100 percent of their face value by the out-of-state unlicensed

People v. Ashmus

54 Cal. 3d 932 · California Supreme Court · Dec 5, 1991

They also presented evidence to establish the facts underlying the latter conviction. … Within their context— *970 clearly in the transcript and more clearly still on the audiotape—defendant’s words cannot reasonably be deemed an invocation of his right to silence.

The People v. Jones

California Supreme Court · Oct 2, 2013

[N]ot all who oppose the death penalty are subject to removal for cause in capital cases; those who firmly believe that the death penalty is unjust may nevertheless serve as jurors in capital cases so long as they state clearly … This claim fails because no evidence establishes such agency.

People v. Harris

47 Cal. 3d 1047 · California Supreme Court · Feb 14, 1989

No misconduct is established. d. Examination of Scott. … The record in this case, independent of the special finding, clearly establishes that defendant was the actual killer and we so find. 34 There being no error prejudicial to defendant at the guilt phase of the trial, the judgment

People v. Hamilton

46 Cal. 3d 123 · California Supreme Court · Jul 28, 1988

They also agreed that Callaway would be given immunity from prosecution for perjury in his earlier testimony in exchange for testifying for the prosecution. … Counsel based the motion on the ground that no connection between the threats and defendant had been established.

Guardianship of Saul H.

California Supreme Court · Aug 15, 2022

Finally, in determining whether mistreatment qualifies as “abuse,” “neglect,” “abandonment,” or a “similar basis” for finding nonviability of reunification (§ 155, subd. … This discussion includes some observations that are clearly relevant to the court’s ultimate holding, and some others that are more in the nature of guidance that may be pertinent in future cases, if not this one.

People v. Ramirez

46 Cal. Rptr. 3d 677 · California Supreme Court · Aug 7, 2006

Maury, supra, 30 Cal.4th 342, 395 .) “ ‘ “The burden is on the party seeking severance to clearly establish that there is a substantial danger of prejudice requiring that the charges be separately tried.” … Prospective jurors are randomly summoned from this list of qualified jurors when a court requires jurors. Dr.

Olson v. Cory

27 Cal. 3d 532 · California Supreme Court · Mar 27, 1980

This court as now constituted is qualified to hear and determine the issues before us. … In contrast, the Legislature has provided California judges with a cost-of-living provision as part of their established salaries. Applicability .

People v. Avena

13 Cal. 4th 394 · California Supreme Court · Jun 10, 1996

Superior Court, supra, 28 Cal.3d at pages 71-75, requiring sequestered voir dire due to the potential bias that may result from the process of death-qualifying prospective jurors. (See People v. … Second, even assuming the trial court understood the prosecutor as clearly supporting the instruction at one point, this fact is not relevant.

Estate of Lund

26 Cal. 2d 472 · California Supreme Court · May 31, 1945

follow that established by his father) does not defeat his claim. … As justifying the departure from established legal principles, Mr.

People v. Jones

17 Cal. 4th 279 · California Supreme Court · Jan 29, 1998

With regard to the hearsay rule, a qualified witness would testify that the microfiche was a trustworthy record made in the regular course of business, near when someone made an attempt to access Haro’s account. (Evid. … The inquiry would clearly and improperly go to the mental processes by which the verdict was reached and the contents of juror deliberations.”

Izazaga v. Superior Court

54 Cal. 3d 356 · California Supreme Court · Aug 30, 1991

As so limited, “good cause” is clearly not broad enough to encompass a claim under the California Constitution generally or under its privilege against self-incrimination specifically. … Simply put, it does not immunize any statutory discovery scheme against attack under the California Constitution, including its privilege against self-incrimination.

Southern California Edison Co. v. Peevey

3 Cal. Rptr. 3d 703 · California Supreme Court · Aug 21, 2003

(See In re Pacific Gas & Electric Co., supra, 76 Cal.P.U.C.2d at p. 647 [“Costs related to nuclear generating assets and above-market contracts with Qualifying Facilities (QFs) account for the majority of estimated transition … Both the March 2001 establishment of the surcharge rates and the November 2002 modification in use of surcharge revenue were decided at open PUC meetings. (Cal. P.U.C., Pub.

Zibbell v. Southern Pacific Co.

160 Cal. 237 · California Supreme Court · Jun 20, 1911

It is incumbent upon the defendant to establish the existence of plaintiff’s contributing negligence. … Clearly, therefore, the question of the contributory negligence of plaintiff was properly submitted to the jury, and the case belongs in the category of those like Henavie v. New York Central R. R. Co., 166 N.

People v. Mehaffey

32 Cal. 2d 535 · California Supreme Court · Sep 3, 1948

At the trial he testified that it was some “35 years ago," when he was “about the age of 16 or 17," *547 that he first saw the tattoo mark on his brother’s arm, that the “outlines [were] clearly visible” to him, that he was … alleged confession not only was made, but was voluntary”; and that a confession is not of such character “when it has been obtained by any kind or degree of violence, abuse or threat, or by any direct or implied promises of immunity

People v. Whalen

56 Cal. 4th 1 · California Supreme Court · Feb 4, 2013

John Richie John Richie testified pursuant to a grant of immunity from prosecution for any crimes associated with his testimony. … The standards governing this claim are well established.

In Re Hoddinott

12 Cal. 4th 992 · California Supreme Court · Mar 25, 1996

At that time, the Legislature added the first paragraph, establishing the procedures by which an unsentenced probationer can constitutionally request sentencing in absentia. (Stats. 1963, ch. 2079, § 1, p. 4345.) … “However, ‘[i]n construing the statutory provisions a court is not authorized to insert qualifying provisions not included and may not rewrite the statute to conform to an assumed intention which does not appear from its

People v. Dyer

45 Cal. 3d 26 · California Supreme Court · Apr 28, 1988

Even if error occurred, it was clearly harmless beyond a reasonable doubt. … The foregoing cases simply illustrate the well established principle that the defense is entitled to elicit evidence that a witness is motivated by an expectation of leniency or immunity (People v.

The Housing Authority v. Dockweiler

14 Cal. 2d 437 · California Supreme Court · Oct 11, 1939

branch of the government is not necessarily binding or conclusive upon the courts, it is entitled to great *450 weight and it is not the duty or prerogative of the courts to interfere with such legislative finding unless it clearly … The legislation does not thereby become class legislation and result in the improper granting of special privileges or immunities to a favored few. The statutory classification is neither arbitrary nor unreasonable.