Case law

In Re Hayes

70 Cal. 2d 604 · California Supreme Court · Mar 17, 1969

That test was not designed to permit multiple sentencing that section 654 clearly forbids but to preclude improper multiplication of sentences when there is at least some arguable question as to the factual divisibility of … Thus if a greater violation is concealed in order to gain "immunity" by prosecution for a lesser crime, section 654 will not apply. ( Kellett v. Superior Court (1966) 63 Cal.2d 822, 827-828 [ 48 Cal.

People v. Rincon-Pineda

14 Cal. 3d 864 · California Supreme Court · Jul 31, 1975

It is well established that the error in failing to give the cautionary instruction is not prejudicial per se. … In other words, the police established that no forcible rape offense or attempt occurred.

Carlson v. Lantz

198 Cal. 407 · California Supreme Court · Apr 1, 1926

Moll, who qualified as an intimate acquaintance, having lived next door to Mrs. Witt for many years as her neighbor, testified that in his opinion she was not of sound mind. … Witt’s property tends to establish the fact that Mr. Lantz concealed from Mrs.

Johnson v. Calvert

5 Cal. 4th 84 · California Supreme Court · May 20, 1993

Passage of the Act clearly was not motivated by the need to resolve surrogacy disputes, which were virtually unknown in 1975. … Clearly, this court should not avoid proper resolution of the issue before it.

L.A. Cnty. Bd. of Supervisors v. Superior Court of L.A. Cnty.

212 Cal. Rptr. 3d 107 · California Supreme Court · Dec 29, 2016

Before 1965, the long- established rule in California was that the attorney-client privilege — then set 16 forth in the Code of Civil Procedure4 — protected communications … The majority‘s suggestion the protective power of the attorney-client privilege under section 954 ―may not‖ (maj. opn., ante, at p. 15) continue to encompass all portions of a document that previously qualified as a ―confidential

Caminetti v. Pac. Mut. Life Ins. Co. of Cal.

22 Cal. 2d 344 · California Supreme Court · Jun 25, 1943

Woodward, 17 U.S. (4 Wheat.) 518 [ 4 L.Ed. 629 ]) established this principle. … The eases cited in the majority opinion establish these general principles beyond doubt. The principle was clearly stated in Home Building & Loan Assn. v.

City of Los Angeles v. Klinker

219 Cal. 198 · California Supreme Court · Oct 4, 1933

An appropriation of land, unless qualified when made, is an appropriation of all that is annexed to the land, whether classified as buildings or as fixtures, and so it has frequently been held.” In Banner Milling Co. v. … Clearly this is not allowable under our decisions construing section 1248, subdivision 1, of the Code of Civil Procedure.

City of Long Beach v. Bozek

31 Cal. 3d 527 · California Supreme Court · Jun 1, 1982

The city appeals. [2] (2) "To establish a cause of action for the malicious prosecution of a civil proceeding, a plaintiff must plead and prove that the prior action (1) was commenced by or at the direction of the defendant … The amendment was clearly intended to broaden the right of petition to make it extend to petitions to all branches of government, not merely to the Legislature.

Nichols v. McCoy

38 Cal. 2d 447 · California Supreme Court · Feb 21, 1952

Section 1953f provides: "A record of an act, condition or event, shall, in so far as relevant, be competent evidence if the custodian or other qualified witness testifies to its identity and the mode of its preparation, and … This case sets one more flagstone in the path departing from established standards. Illustrative of the trend see People v. Clapp (1944), 24 Cal.2d 835, 840 [ 151 P.2d 237 ]; People v.

People v. Dominguez

47 Cal. Rptr. 3d 575 · California Supreme Court · Aug 28, 2006

Into the orchard in the rural part of the county that is clearly secluded.” … In answering the jury’s question, the trial court did not clarify whether the September 27 possession could qualify as “on or about” October 25.

Whitfield v. Roth

10 Cal. 3d 874 · California Supreme Court · Mar 12, 1974

It is obvious that the testimony concerning the opinion of the other doctors who were not present in court, and who had not been qualified as experts was hearsay. “ ‘The reason for this is obvious. … As clearly revealed by the pretrial conference order Dr. Skinner did not claim these allegations to be inconsistent with the earlier pleadings.

Bouch v. Rombotis

30 Cal. 3d 880 · California Supreme Court · Mar 1, 1982

In retrospect, that instrument was quite clearly valid under the precedents discussed herein. … As stated above, we are to read the decedent’s will as he wrote it and not as we would write it in order to cause it to comply with established legal principles.” (Italics in original.) (Ibid.)

People v. Gutierrez

124 Cal. Rptr. 2d 373 · California Supreme Court · Oct 2, 2002

Bradford (1997) 15 Cal.4th 1229, 1315 [ 65 Cal.Rptr.2d 145 , 939 P.2d 259 ] (Bradford).) “6 “The burden is on the party seeking severance to clearly establish that there is a substantial danger of prejudice requiring that … Moreover, this is not a situation in which convictions of both murders had to be secured in order to qualify defendant for the death penalty.

People v. Demetrulias

45 Cal. Rptr. 3d 407 · California Supreme Court · Jul 10, 2006

The prosecutor did not argue that a mental or emotional disturbance could not mitigate the crime unless it qualified as “extreme.” … (See ante, pt. 5.) 8 Defendant contends any objection would clearly have been futile in light of the court’s overruling of previous objections.

Graham v. DaimlerChrysler Corp.

21 Cal. Rptr. 3d 331 · California Supreme Court · Jan 12, 2005

Moreover, plaintiffs do not qualify for attorney fees even under the majority's catalyst theory. … establish that either was at issue.

Pasadena Junior College District v. Board of Supervisors

216 Cal. 61 · California Supreme Court · Jul 25, 1932

Clifton was the duly appointed, qualified and acting Superintendent of Schools of said Los Angeles County, and G. F. … It clearly appears from the facts thus stipulated that the report of the superintendent of schools made in July, 1931, and the action of the Board of Supervisors in making the levy on or about September 1, 1931, both related

Sullivan v. Gage

145 Cal. 759 · California Supreme Court · Jan 16, 1905

Eeddy qualified as receiver, took possession of some of the property of the corporation, and so continued until the ninth day of June, 1890. … Booth, 46 Cal. 187 , for if it does not, then clearly this action will not lie.

People v. Cuevas

12 Cal. 4th 252 · California Supreme Court · Dec 26, 1995

We do not lightly overrule such an established precedent. … Moreover, this court has previously qualified the Gould corroboration requirement in two respects. In People v. Chavez, supra, 26 Cal.3d 334, 362-364 , and People v.

People v. Morrison

21 Cal. Rptr. 3d 682 · California Supreme Court · Dec 9, 2004

To establish a prima facie case, the defendant must: (1) make as complete a record as feasible; (2) establish that the persons excluded are members of a cognizable group; and (3) show a strong likelihood or reasonable inference … For purposes of the exception, a statement may qualify as spontaneous if it is undertaken without deliberation or reflection. (See Farmer, supra, at p. 903 .)

Bank of Italy v. Johnson

200 Cal. 1 · California Supreme Court · Dec 15, 1926

and maintain branch offices in the city and county of San Francisco and elsewhere throughout the state; that on February 1, 1923, the respondent was appointed and became and ever since has been the duly qualified and acting … But when the words are properly given no difference in meaning, the said communication indicates clearly that in the application of the de novo rule the respondent was duly cognizant of his statutory powers and duties under