Case law

People v. Ghobrial

234 Cal. Rptr. 3d 669 · California Supreme Court · Jun 21, 2018

The principles that guide the inquiry are well established. … The jury was properly instructed with CALJIC No. 2.90, which establishes the prosecution’s burden of establishing the defendant’s guilt “beyond a reasonable doubt.”

Pavlovich v. Superior Court

127 Cal. Rptr. 2d 329 · California Supreme Court · Nov 25, 2002

"At one end of the spectrum are situations where a defendant clearly does business over the Internet. … They do not establish that such knowledge, by itself, establishes express aiming.

Freedom Newspapers, Inc. v. Orange County Employees Retirement System Board of Directors

6 Cal. 4th 821 · California Supreme Court · Dec 23, 1993

This clearly could not have been the intended effect of the 1992 bill. … The 1993 legislation plainly declares they are not, unless they qualify as "standing committees" therein defined.

People v. Krebs

255 Cal. Rptr. 3d 95 · California Supreme Court · Nov 21, 2019

Because the People have established the corpus delicti for rape, they have also established the corpus delicti for sodomy. (See People v. … Those cases are clearly inapposite because legal insanity is a technical, legal concept.

People v. Gonzales

51 Cal. 4th 894 · California Supreme Court · Jun 2, 2011

In any event, hearsay conversations between defendant and her counsel regarding their legal strategy were clearly inadmissible. *930 Defendant argues that it was an abuse of discretion to permit Dr. … ‘may be directed to the eliciting of any matter which may tend to overcome or qualify the effect of the testimony given ... on direct examination.’ [Citation.]” (People v.

Truck Ins. Exchange v. Kaiser Cement & Gypsum Corp.

California Supreme Court · Jun 17, 2024

First, none of the policies contained any language “clearly or explicitly stat[ing] that [the insured] must exhaust insurance with lower attachment points purchased for different policy periods.” … qualify as underlying insurance that would have to be exhausted prior to accessing the 1983 policy?

Calvert v. State Bar

54 Cal. 3d 765 · California Supreme Court · Nov 25, 1991

Frampton described petitioner as a highly qualified and competent attorney and as one of only two attorneys in the Fresno area who was available to take plaintiffs’ discrimination cases on a regular basis. … Where grounds for a challenge have been established, the referee shall recuse himself or herself. If recusal is not made . . .

Halaco Engineering Co. v. South Central Coast Regional Commission

42 Cal. 3d 52 · California Supreme Court · Jul 10, 1986

This statutory scheme clearly empowers the Commission not only to allow or prohibit proposed developments but also to regulate the manner in which the development is "performed" (§ 30600, subd. … otherwise indicated. [2] There is an arguable analogy between Halaco's claim of a right to continue dumping waste to the outer limits of its parcel and claims by operators of quarries or similar extractive enterprises to immunity

In re D.N.

California Supreme Court · Dec 12, 2022

On the one hand, the probation officer qualifies as a peace officer for purposes of enforcing compliance with the conditions of probation. (Pen. Code, § 830.5, subd. (a)(1).) … More analogous to the present order is the diversion program established by section 654.

People v. Coleman

38 Cal. 3d 69 · California Supreme Court · Feb 25, 1985

Furthermore, each psychiatrist stated clearly that no opinion had been formed until after the interview had confirmed his suspicions. … Axelrad quite clearly testified that he had no way of evaluating the truth of the allegations in the letters.

L.A. County Bd. Supervisors v. Super. Ct.

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

People v. Riggs

44 Cal. 4th 248 · California Supreme Court · Jul 10, 2008

He is clearly intelligent, articulate, appears to understand the difficulty that he’s facing representing himself and is willing to shoulder that responsibility at his peril.” … Presence of motive may tend to establish guilt. Absence of motive may tend to establish innocence.

People v. Poggi

45 Cal. 3d 306 · California Supreme Court · May 16, 1988

None, as we shall explain, establishes reversible error. 1. Musgrove’s Statements. … Since the statutory requirements for joinder were clearly met in this case, defendant can predicate error only on a clear showing of potential *321 prejudice. (Williams v.

People v. Bacigalupo

1 Cal. 4th 103 · California Supreme Court · Dec 9, 1991

“ ‘the corpus delicti of murder [has] been established.’ ” (People v. … The few errors during the penalty phase were each clearly harmless; thus, even when considered together, reversal is not required. I.

Doe v. Super. Ct.

California Supreme Court · Jul 27, 2023

The District did not defend the trial court’s view that the evidence failed to qualify as “sexual conduct” under what the District belatedly acknowledged as the relevant statutes, sections 1106 and 783. … complaining witness at issue to fully establish the proffered defense.” (Ibid.)

Cal. Capital Ins. Co. v. Hoehn

California Supreme Court · Nov 18, 2024

Likewise, California courts have held that “compliance with the statutory procedures for service of process is essential to establish personal jurisdiction . . . . … The Court of Appeal parsed that term and declined to consider Hoehn’s claim of “extrinsic mistake,” finding that he “did not clearly advance” that theory in the trial court.

Patterson v. Domino's Pizza, LLC

60 Cal. 4th 474 · California Supreme Court · Aug 28, 2014

Patterson contends that rejection of her views would immunize franchisors from vicarious liability for enterprise-related harm. … Antelope Valley Community College Dist. (2008) 45 Cal.4th 88, 96), the record would clearly permit the trier of fact to conclude that Domino‘s retained and exercised that power.

People v. Ghent

43 Cal. 3d 739 · California Supreme Court · Aug 13, 1987

Defendant's primary defenses at trial were his lack of deliberation and premeditation, and insufficiency of the evidence to establish forcible rape. … Under the circumstances, any error in instructing on abandonment of criminal intent was clearly harmless. 8.

Messner v. Journeymen Barbers, Hairdressers & Cosmetologists, International Union of America, Local 256

53 Cal. 2d 873 · California Supreme Court · Apr 7, 1960

In the present case, the court below naturally felt bound to follow and apply the law as clearly announced by this court. … Ann., ch. 8, § 23-1322: “It shall be unlawful for any labor organization to picket any establishment unless there exists between the employer and the majority of employees of such establishment a bona fide dispute regarding

People v. Hajek and Vo

58 Cal. 4th 1144 · California Supreme Court · May 5, 2014

But unlike the constitutional right [to counsel], the statutory right to appointed second counsel is qualified.” (People v. … Alice’s remark was clearly based on her observation of Vo’s open use of the knife on her mother.