Case law

People v. Whisenhunt

44 Cal. 4th 174 · California Supreme Court · Jun 30, 2008

Here the photographs were clearly relevant to the determination of many disputed facts at the guilt phase, particularly the murder by torture theory. (Evid. Code, § 210.) … Presence of motive may tend to establish guilt. Absence of motive may tend to establish innocence. You will therefore give its presence or absence, as the case may be, the weight to which you find it to be entitled.”

People v. Miles

9 Cal. 5th 513 · California Supreme Court · May 28, 2020

The trial court found that a prima facie case had been established. … The state court agreed that Bounds was “ ‘clearly qualified to be seated as a juror’ ” but concluded that excusing Bounds was harmless error. (Id. at p. 657.)

NBC Subsidiary (KNBC-TV), Inc. v. Superior Court

86 Cal. Rptr. 2d 778 · California Supreme Court · Jul 27, 1999

The court held that a qualified First Amendment right of access applied (id., at p. 13 [106 S.Ct. at pp. 2742-2743]), and that the state statute permitting closure must be construed consistent with First Amendment requirements … Under the authority discussed, ante, part II C, the latter acts clearly are subject to “exacting First Amendment scrutiny.” 43 In support of its broad proposition that access to proceedings held outside the presence of the

People v. Casares

62 Cal. 4th 808 · California Supreme Court · Feb 4, 2016

Defendant contends the trial court erred in admitting evidence of his prior unadjudicated criminal conduct under section 190.3, factor (b), because each instance of misconduct was either legally or factually insufficient to qualify … he had actual or constructive possession, gives rise to an assumption there was an implied threat of violence there. . . . [¶] Handguns or most handguns, unless they‘re clearly for competition like a target pistol, have

People v. Houston

54 Cal. 4th 1186 · California Supreme Court · Aug 2, 2012

Court staff and the presiding judge then interviewed the venire members to determine whether they were qualified and able to serve as grand jurors, and excused those who were not. … The questionnaire clearly instructed the prospective jurors that they were to complete it under penalty of perjury.

City of Gilroy v. Superior Court

California Supreme Court · Jan 15, 2026

Cashman (2002) 29 Cal.4th 69, 79 (City of Cotati) [a plaintiff can generally seek “ ‘declaratory relief . . . when the parties . . . dispute whether a public entity has engaged in conduct or established policies in violation … (a)), and those that bring “clearly frivolous” cases are required to pay “court costs and reasonable attorney’s fees to the public agency” (id., subd. (b)).

People v. Thomas

51 Cal. 4th 449 · California Supreme Court · Feb 3, 2011

This does not mean that the members of such a group are immune from peremptory challenges: individual members thereof may still be struck on grounds of specific bias . .. .” (People v. … Thus, the question of whether defendant established a prima facie case is moot.”]; but see People v.

Fox v. Hale & Norcross Silver Mining Co.

108 Cal. 369 · California Supreme Court · Aug 3, 1895

them owned but 5 or 10 shares, respectively, out of a total of 112,000 shares, and these trifling amounts of stock had, in several instances, been transferred to them by Levy or the mill-owners for the express purpose of qualifying … This fact was clearly proved when the plaintiff closed his case in chief by the testimony of his own witness, Mr. John W.

People v. Gray

33 Cal. Rptr. 3d 451 · California Supreme Court · Aug 25, 2005

Assuming without deciding we can consider the prosecutor’s volunteered reasons when the trial court did not, we find the prosecutor did not clearly rely on Juror R.H.’s Catholicism. … Defendant thus bears the burden of establishing constitutionally inadequate assistance of counsel. (Strickland v.

Rosemary Properties, Inc. v. McColgan

29 Cal. 2d 677 · California Supreme Court · Feb 18, 1947

." *684 The design of the act clearly contemplates the oil and gas percentage depletion ( 8(g)) and the dividend deduction ( 8(h)) as independent allowances to be taken by two separate corporations in the computation of their … Even this construction would not support plaintiff's contention, for the section would still contain the qualifying *697 phrase, "which has been included in the measure of the tax" a phrase that recognizes unequivocally that

P. v. Williams

California Supreme Court · May 1, 2013

Prospective Juror R.H. was clearly excludable for cause, as defendant concedes. … You understand that quite clearly? ―A. Yes, sir.‖ Defendant claims the trial court should not have permitted such leading questions.

Bliss v. California Cooperative Producers

30 Cal. 2d 240 · California Supreme Court · Jun 3, 1947

The stock (other than director's qualifying shares) was to be issued only to associations of producers (which were to be organized) who marketed their products through the corporation. … Civil Code, section 3137 (N.I.L., 56) clearly makes the good or bad faith of the transferee the only test.

Weil v. Federal Kemper Life Assurance Co.

7 Cal. 4th 125 · California Supreme Court · Jan 31, 1994

Defendant also urged that plaintiffs had not established that acts other than Mr. … carried a weapon both on and off duty, and had qualified as a sharpshooter.

People v. Rogers

48 Cal. Rptr. 3d 1 · California Supreme Court · Aug 21, 2006

Defendant’s jury was clearly instructed that first degree murder required not only an intentional killing, but one that is deliberate and premeditated. (CALJIC No. 8.20.) … Rather, the jury was instructed that when implied malice is established, “it is not necessary to establish that a defendant intended that his act would result in a death of a human being.”

People v. Arturo D.

115 Cal. Rptr. 2d 581 · California Supreme Court · Jan 24, 2002

Clearly this is not the law. … As the qualifying phrase "[w]ithin constitutional limits" suggests, Webster recognized that an officer's mere desire to secure license or registration documents from a motorist would be insufficient by itself to qualify as

People v. Gutierrez

45 Cal. 4th 789 · California Supreme Court · Feb 19, 2009

A trial court is required to substitute counsel “ ‘in a situation where the record clearly shows that the first appointed counsel is not adequately representing the accused.’ ” (Ibid.) … admission by the witness of untruthfulness] [;] “[The witness’ prior conviction of a felony] [;] “[Past criminal conduct of a witness amounting to a misdemeanor] [;] “[Whether the witness is testifying under a grant of immunity

People v. Sirhan

7 Cal. 3d 710 · California Supreme Court · Jun 16, 1972

Here at the motion for a new trial the prosecutor clearly enunciated that theory. … or class of qualified citizens or discrimination in the compiling of the voter registration lists.

Naranjo v. Spectrum Security Services, Inc.

California Supreme Court · May 23, 2022

The law establishes different payment deadlines depending on the manner of departure. … (a) [establishing timing for payment of “wages”].)

People v. Howard

44 Cal. 3d 375 · California Supreme Court · Feb 16, 1988

They were clearly relevant and not in and of themselves highly prejudicial regarding the reasons for defendant's conduct. … In other words, in Cantrell we permitted use of extrajudicial statements to establish the degree of the crime.

In re Cowdery

69 Cal. 32 · California Supreme Court · Feb 27, 1886

that a solicitor discharged by his client for any reason other than misconduct is differently situated from a solicitor, who has withdrawn voluntarily from the cause in which he had been employed, and that he was therefore clearly … of the former solicitor-general that in his official capacity he must be considered as standing indifferent between the people of the state and the defendant who is indicted; that when his successor has been elected and qualified