Cal. Codes » Government Code / TITLE 1. GENERAL / DIVISION 4. PUBLIC OFFICERS AND EMPLOYEES / CHAPTER 7. Removal from Office / ARTICLE 3. Removal Other Than by Impeachment
California Codes

Cal. Government Code § 3060 (2026)

Removal Other Than by Impeachment

✓ leginfo export of Sept. 26, 2026 (applied Oct. 1, 2026)
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section CA-LEGleginfo.legislature.ca.gov JustiaCode on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

An accusation in writing against any officer of a district, county, or city, including any member of the governing board or personnel commission of a school district or any humane officer, for willful or corrupt misconduct in office, may be presented by the grand jury of the county for, or in, which the officer accused is elected or appointed. The grand jury presenting the accusation may also be the additional grand jury impaneled pursuant to Section 904.4, 904.6, or 904.8 of the Penal Code. An accusation may not be presented without the concurrence of at least 12 grand jurors, or at least 8 grand jurors in a county in which the required number of members of the grand jury is 11, or at least 14 grand jurors in a county in which the required number of members of the grand jury is 23.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 28 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1956–2024 · leading case: Stark v. Superior Court, 257 P.3d 41 (Cal. 2011).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Stark v. Superior Court, 257 P.3d 41 (Cal. 2011). · cites it 14× “Government Code Section 3060—Mental State In his petition, Stark sought review of the mental state required for willful misconduct under Government Code section 3060.”
Venegas v. Cnty. of Los Angeles, 87 P.3d 1 (Cal. 2004). · cites it 2× “(Gov. Code, § 3060; People v. Hulburt (1977) 75 Cal.”
Schmidlin v. City of Palo Alto, 157 Cal. App. 4th 728 (Cal. Ct. App. 2008). · cites it 2× “) A statute authorizing removal from office for "willful or corrupt misconduct in office" (Gov.Code, § 3060) cannot itself be understood to forbid or command any act.”
People v. Mgebrov, 166 Cal. App. 4th 579 (Cal. Ct. App. 2008). · cites it 2× “First, they contend that “dismissal of the ‘accusations or information’ in a case suggests that the relief provided” is “dismissal of the entire accusatory pleading, not simply individual charges in the accusatory pleading,” and elsewhere contend that “accusations” “could be…”
People v. Rogers, 245 Cal. App. 4th 1353 (Cal. Ct. App. 2016). “) 11 While the amendment to add a GBI enhancement after a preliminary hearing waiver appears to be an issue not previously addressed in a published decision, the same is not true for the new charges added by the amendment. Business and Professions Code section 6086.”
Thomas Brewster v. Shasta Cnty., a Pub. Entity Brad McDannold an Individual D. Compomizzo, an Individual, 275 F.3d 803 (9th Cir. 2001). “IV, § 18; Cal. Gov.Code § 3060; People v. Hulburt, 75 Cal.”
Penrod v. Cnty. of San Bernardino, 126 Cal. App. 4th 185 (Cal. Ct. App. 2005). · cites it 2× “" Although he concedes the board has not tried or threatened to use its removal powers, Penrod also objects that the ordinance has the potential to interfere with the sheriff's investigative and prosecutorial functions.”
People v. Cockburn, 109 Cal. App. 4th 1151 (Cal. Ct. App. 2003). “Code, § 3001), a special statute, evinces a legislative intent that it be treated as a distinct form of misconduct, rather than as charged, willful or corrupt misconduct in office (Gov. Code, § 3060)].) “The doctrine that a specific statute precludes any prosecution under a…”
Mccomb v. Comm. on Jud. Performance, 564 P.2d 1 (Cal. 1977). “He was appointed to the Supreme Court in 1956, and the electorate later approved a 12-year term on the court commencing in January 1967.”
Read v. City of Lynwood, 173 Cal. App. 3d 437 (Cal. Ct. App. 1985). “Code, §§ 1090, 1097, 8920), corrupt misconduct in office (Gov. Code, § 3060), and commission of certain crimes while acting in an official capacity (Gov.”
Boags v. Mun. Court, 197 Cal. App. 3d 65 (Cal. Ct. App. 1987). “(b); Gov. Code, § 3040.) A judge is also subject to the penalty of removal from office “for willful or corrupt misconduct in office” upon accusation by a grand jury and conviction after a trial by jury in the superior court.”
People v. Hulburt, 75 Cal. App. 3d 404 (Cal. Ct. App. 1977). “y in uniform and on the premises of the sheriff’s department; 2) solicited contributions from other deputies while on duty; 3) directed and supervised other deputies who circulated petitions for signatures; 4) used his authority and influence to pressure other deputies of the…”
Show all 28 citing cases →
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.