Case law

People v. Cash

122 Cal. Rptr. 2d 545 · California Supreme Court · Jul 25, 2002

Voir dire of each prospective juror proceeded in three steps: The court asked death-qualifying questions, attorneys for each side posed death-qualifying questions, and finally each side posed questions on general voir dire … We have endorsed such particularized death-qualifying voir dire in a variety of situations.

People v. Mosley

60 Cal. 4th 1044 · California Supreme Court · Mar 2, 2015

By contrast, section 3003.5(b) clearly “imposes an affirmative disability or restraint” that suggests its punitive character. ( Smith, supra, 538 U.S. at p. 97.) … Although “[a]ny number of governmental programs might deter crime without imposing punishment” ( Smith, supra, 538 U.S. at p. 102), the residency restriction hardly qualifies as ordinary government regulation.

In re Palmer

10 Cal. 5th 959 · California Supreme Court · Jan 28, 2021

punishment does not qualify as constitutionally excessive unless it is “ ‘out of all proportion to the offense.’ ” (Lynch, supra, at p. 424.) … What Rodriguez claimed was that his prolonged confinement under an indeterminate life sentence qualified as constitutionally disproportionate punishment.

Mangini v. Aerojet-General Corp.

12 Cal. 4th 1087 · California Supreme Court · Apr 4, 1996

/trespass theories of liability in all other respects, particularly the contention that the contamination of their property caused by Aerojet’s dumping and burning of hazardous chemicals over the life of its lease might qualify … In this case the evidence clearly showed that no one knows how bad the contamination is or how to remedy it—indicating an absence of substantial evidence of abatability.

Alexander v. Superior Court

9 Cal. 3d 387 · California Supreme Court · Apr 26, 1973

If the informant actually gave the crucial information which the dissent is willing to “infer,” such information clearly should have been—and, we believe; would have been—included in the affidavit. … Two did not qualify “residence” by the word “former.” In adding that qualification, the majority has drawn an inference contrary to one the magistrate and superior court reasonably could have drawn.

Santa Monica Pines, Ltd. v. Rent Control Board

35 Cal. 3d 858 · California Supreme Court · Apr 20, 1984

That amount ($1,709) is clearly inconsequential when considered in light of the building's purchase price of $2.2 million. … First of all, there is no law or rule of thumb that requires expenditure of some fixed percentage of the purchase price in order to qualify for a vested right.

People v. Sandoval

California Supreme Court · Jan 7, 2016

It then compounds this factual error with a legal one: engaging in a mode of analysis that we clearly rejected just four years ago. … Moreover, the federal approach is clearly at odds with our state constitutional duty as a reviewing court.

City & County of San Francisco v. Boyd

17 Cal. 2d 606 · California Supreme Court · Mar 12, 1941

In none of them was there involved such a city charter as that involved herein. ’ In each of them the duties of some county official, specifically established by the general law, were to be duplicated by a contract for the … A reading of the entire text of said several sections indicates clearly that it was the intention of the framers of the charter that civil service should apply only to persons employed in permanent positions in municipal

People v. Osslo

50 Cal. 2d 75 · California Supreme Court · Mar 26, 1958

And the judge clearly and repeatedly instructed the jury that they were to decide the case on the basis of the evidence and further clearly instructed them that arguments of counsel were not evidence. [3] [28] Defendants … Under the holding here, no association, no telephone call, can be innocent and immune from a later charge of conspiracy if one of the parties should later be accused of a crime of any type.

People v. Gilbert

63 Cal. 2d 690 · California Supreme Court · Dec 15, 1965

The detailed inadmissible statements, including admissions of guilty knowledge, clearly left King no choice but to take the stand and attempt to exculpate himself by testifying that he did not know that Gilbert and Weaver … Thus, in providing for a separate penalty trial, the Legislature expressed a preference for one jury qualified to act throughout the entire case.

Universal Consolidated Oil Co. v. Byram

25 Cal. 2d 353 · California Supreme Court · Dec 5, 1944

In this respect the case does not differ from that of a jury or an umpire, if we assume that the members of the Board were not entitled to the possibly higher immunities of a judge. (Duke of Buccleuch v. … That the taxpayer must present his claim of over-valuation and discrimination to the board and that on review the court may examine only the evidence before the board is clearly indicated in Hammond L. Co. v.

People v. Hughes

116 Cal. Rptr. 2d 401 · California Supreme Court · Apr 10, 2002

what [he] was doing, who clearly was goal directed, and who clearly intended to kill and did, and who, without any doubt, committed the robbery and burglary and sodomy.” … Contrary to defendant’s suggestions, an object need not be inherently deadly in order to qualify as a deadly weapon under section 4574 (People v.

People v. Wash

6 Cal. 4th 215 · California Supreme Court · Nov 18, 1993

We have observed that the testimony of a parent to establish the identity of a murder victim may not be relevant if there is an offer to stipulate to the facts to be established by the testimony. (People v. … But even if we were to assume that the photographs were improperly admitted, they clearly could not have prejudiced defendant in light of the overwhelming evidence establishing defendant’s guilt relating to the murders of

Bagdasarian v. Gragnon

31 Cal. 2d 744 · California Supreme Court · Apr 30, 1948

Other cases and texts clearly show that “value,” in connection with legal problems, ordinarily means market value. (See Wade v. Rathbun, 23 Cal.App.2dSupp. 758, 759 et seq. [ 67 P.2d 765 ]; Yellen v. … There is no merit in appellant’s contention that the farmers, farm appraisers and real estate brokers who gave expert testimony for respondents on the subject of value were not properly qualified.

People v. Blackburn

61 Cal. 4th 1113 · California Supreme Court · Aug 17, 2015

Further, even if Blackburn could establish error, he could not establish prejudice in light of Dr. Perry‘s uncontested adverse testimony. … Of course, the qualifier is all-important here.

People v. Wolff

61 Cal. 2d 795 · California Supreme Court · Aug 31, 1964

While the jury may not draw inferences inconsistent with incontestably established facts (People v. … J., Traynor, J., McComb, J., Peters, J., Tobriner, J., and Peek, J., concurred. 1 "[T]o establish a defence on the ground of insanity, it must be clearly proved that, at the time of committing the act, the party accused was

People v. Ricardo P. (In Re Ricardo P.)

251 Cal. Rptr. 3d 104 · California Supreme Court · Aug 15, 2019

Second, the electronics search condition clearly “ ‘relates to conduct which is not in itself criminal.’ ” (Ibid.) … But it is well- established that the juvenile court has particularly broad latitude in crafting appropriate conditions of probation.

In Re Bell

19 Cal. 2d 488 · California Supreme Court · Feb 13, 1942

This conclusion is in accordance with long established principles. … This method of pleading is clearly improper.

Southern California Gas Co. v. Public Utilities Commission

50 Cal. 3d 31 · California Supreme Court · Jan 29, 1990

What is not clear is whether revealing the fact and the conclusion of a communication is sufficient to qualify as a waiver of the privilege. … The court held that the information sought by defendants clearly fell within the purview of the attorney-client privilege.

Cadwell v. State Bar

15 Cal. 3d 762 · California Supreme Court · Dec 22, 1975

The California Attorney General notified the chapter, which had not been qualified as a charitable institution, that it could not legally continue to operate certain thrift stores and that only an independent charitable organization … [The findings are silent as to what was done with the $2,500, and the record filed with us does not clearly establish where that money ultimately went.]