without error in California

20 California opinions name it 3 courts 1919–2024 2 in the last five years

The cases below were cited by California courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.

Followed or applied (9)

Case	Followed	Cited
United States v. Salernogreen scotus · 1987 · cited in 2 California opinions naming this issue, 2018–2018 2 sentences 2018Acknowledging that a bail scheme that "might operate unconstitutionally under some conceivable set of circumstances is insufficient to render it wholly invalid" ( United States v. Salerno (1987) 481 U.S. 739 , 745, 107 S.Ct. 2095 , 95 L.Ed.2d 697 ) ( Salerno ), petitioner does not claim California's money bail system is facially unconstitutional. 2018Acknowledging that a bail scheme that "might operate unconstitutionally under some conceivable set of circumstances is insufficient to render it wholly invalid" ( United States v. Salerno (1987) 481 U.S. 739 , 745, 107 S.Ct. 2095 , 95 L.Ed.2d 697 ) ( Salerno ), petitioner does not claim California's money bail system is facially unconstitutional.	1	2
Forbes v. Jose S.green calctapp · 1978 · cited in 2 California opinions naming this issue, 1985–1985 2 sentences 1985(Kohn v. Superior Court (1966) 239 Cal.App.2d 428, 430 [ 48 Cal.Rptr. 832 ].) Thus the 1965 “addition preserves the right of a party to disqualify a judge under Code of Civil Procedure section 170.6 notwithstanding the fact the judge had heard and determined an earlier demurrer or motion, or other matter not involving ‘contested fact issues’ relating ‘to the merits’ without challenge in the same cause.” {In re Jose S., supra, 78 Cal.App.3d at p. 626 .) If, on the other hand, the judge has presided at a prior, pretrial hearing involving a contested issue of fact relating to the merits, a subseq 1985This addition preserves the right of a party to disqualify a judge under . . . section 170.6 notwithstanding the *657 fact the judge had heard and determined an earlier demurrer or motion, or other matter not involving ‘contested fact issues’ relating ‘to the merits’ without challenge in the same cause. [Citation.]” (In re Jose S. (1978) 78 Cal.App.3d 619, 626 [ 144 Cal.Rptr. 309 ]; accord Brown v. Swickard (1985) 163 Cal.App.3d 820, 825 [ 209 Cal.Rptr. 844 ].) Since the 1965 amendment to section 170.6, “[a] variety of pretrial motions have been found not to involve a determination of conteste	1	2
Kriegler v. Eichler Homes, Inc.green calctapp · 1969 · cited in 1 California opinions naming this issue, 2001–2001 2 sentences 2001The authors pointed out that the same could be said of all warranties. (1 White & Summers, Uniform Commercial Code, supra, § 11-9, p. 610.) 6 The only contrary authority is Kriegler v. Eichler Homes, Inc. (1969) 269 Cal.App.2d 224, 226-227 [ 74 Cal.Rptr. 749 ], where the court without analysis of the point sustained an award apparently based on the diminished value of a home resulting from a defective heating system. 2001The authors pointed out that the same could be said of all warranties. (1 White & Summers, Uniform Commercial Code, supra, § 11-9, p. 610.) 6 The only contrary authority is Kriegler v. Eichler Homes, Inc. (1969) 269 Cal.App.2d 224, 226-227 [ 74 Cal.Rptr. 749 ], where the court without analysis of the point sustained an award apparently based on the diminished value of a home resulting from a defective heating system.	1	1
Kohn v. Superior Courtgreen calctapp · 1966 · cited in 1 California opinions naming this issue, 1985–1985 2 sentences 1985(Kohn v. Superior Court (1966) 239 Cal.App.2d 428, 430 [ 48 Cal.Rptr. 832 ].) Thus the 1965 “addition preserves the right of a party to disqualify a judge under Code of Civil Procedure section 170.6 notwithstanding the fact the judge had heard and determined an earlier demurrer or motion, or other matter not involving ‘contested fact issues’ relating ‘to the merits’ without challenge in the same cause.” {In re Jose S., supra, 78 Cal.App.3d at p. 626 .) If, on the other hand, the judge has presided at a prior, pretrial hearing involving a contested issue of fact relating to the merits, a subseq 1985(Kohn v. Superior Court (1966) 239 Cal.App.2d 428, 430 [ 48 Cal.Rptr. 832 ].) Thus the 1965 “addition preserves the right of a party to disqualify a judge under Code of Civil Procedure section 170.6 notwithstanding the fact the judge had heard and determined an earlier demurrer or motion, or other matter not involving ‘contested fact issues’ relating ‘to the merits’ without challenge in the same cause.” {In re Jose S., supra, 78 Cal.App.3d at p. 626 .) If, on the other hand, the judge has presided at a prior, pretrial hearing involving a contested issue of fact relating to the merits, a subseq	1	1
People v. Richardgreen calctapp · 1978 · cited in 1 California opinions naming this issue, 1985–1985 2 sentences 1985(Kohn v. Superior Court (1966) 239 Cal.App.2d 428, 430 [ 48 Cal.Rptr. 832 ].) Thus the 1965 “addition preserves the right of a party to disqualify a judge under Code of Civil Procedure section 170.6 notwithstanding the fact the judge had heard and determined an earlier demurrer or motion, or other matter not involving ‘contested fact issues’ relating ‘to the merits’ without challenge in the same cause.” {In re Jose S., supra, 78 Cal.App.3d at p. 626 .) If, on the other hand, the judge has presided at a prior, pretrial hearing involving a contested issue of fact relating to the merits, a subseq 1985(Kohn v. Superior Court (1966) 239 Cal.App.2d 428, 430 [ 48 Cal.Rptr. 832 ].) Thus the 1965 “addition preserves the right of a party to disqualify a judge under Code of Civil Procedure section 170.6 notwithstanding the fact the judge had heard and determined an earlier demurrer or motion, or other matter not involving ‘contested fact issues’ relating ‘to the merits’ without challenge in the same cause.” {In re Jose S., supra, 78 Cal.App.3d at p. 626 .) If, on the other hand, the judge has presided at a prior, pretrial hearing involving a contested issue of fact relating to the merits, a subseq	1	1
Brown v. Swickardgreen calctapp · 1985 · cited in 1 California opinions naming this issue, 1985–1985 2 sentences 1985This addition preserves the right of a party to disqualify a judge under . . . section 170.6 notwithstanding the 657 fact the judge had heard and determined an earlier demurrer or motion, or other matter not involving ‘contested fact issues’ relating ‘to the merits’ without challenge in the same cause. [Citation.]” (In re Jose S. (1978) 78 Cal.App.3d 619, 626 [ 144 Cal.Rptr. 309 ]; accord Brown v. Swickard (1985) 163 Cal.App.3d 820, 825 [ 209 Cal.Rptr. 844 ].) Since the 1965 amendment to section 170.6, “[a] variety of pretrial motions have been found not to involve a determination of conteste 1985This addition preserves the right of a party to disqualify a judge under . . . section 170.6 notwithstanding the 657 fact the judge had heard and determined an earlier demurrer or motion, or other matter not involving ‘contested fact issues’ relating ‘to the merits’ without challenge in the same cause. [Citation.]” (In re Jose S. (1978) 78 Cal.App.3d 619, 626 [ 144 Cal.Rptr. 309 ]; accord Brown v. Swickard (1985) 163 Cal.App.3d 820, 825 [ 209 Cal.Rptr. 844 ].) Since the 1965 amendment to section 170.6, “[a] variety of pretrial motions have been found not to involve a determination of conteste	1	1
People v. Reevesgreen cal · 1966 · cited in 1 California opinions naming this issue, 1978–1978 2 sentences 1978The inadequacy complained of must be of substantial proportion and, because of such inadequacy, the trial must have been reduced to a “ ‘farce or a sham.’ ” (People v. Ibarra (1963) 60 Cal.2d 460, 464 [ 34 Cal.Rptr. 863 , 386 P.2d 487 ]; see also People v. Reeves (1966) 64 Cal.2d 766 [ 51 Cal.Rptr. 691 , 415 P.2d 35 ].) It is conceded, of course, that a trial without error is not the standard. 1978The inadequacy complained of must be of substantial proportion and, because of such inadequacy, the trial must have been reduced to a “ ‘farce or a sham.’ ” (People v. Ibarra (1963) 60 Cal.2d 460, 464 [ 34 Cal.Rptr. 863 , 386 P.2d 487 ]; see also People v. Reeves (1966) 64 Cal.2d 766 [ 51 Cal.Rptr. 691 , 415 P.2d 35 ].) It is conceded, of course, that a trial without error is not the standard.	1	1
People v. Ibarragreen cal · 1963 · cited in 1 California opinions naming this issue, 1978–1978 2 sentences 1978The inadequacy complained of must be of substantial proportion and, because of such inadequacy, the trial must have been reduced to a “ ‘farce or a sham.’ ” (People v. Ibarra (1963) 60 Cal.2d 460, 464 [ 34 Cal.Rptr. 863 , 386 P.2d 487 ]; see also People v. Reeves (1966) 64 Cal.2d 766 [ 51 Cal.Rptr. 691 , 415 P.2d 35 ].) It is conceded, of course, that a trial without error is not the standard. 1978The inadequacy complained of must be of substantial proportion and, because of such inadequacy, the trial must have been reduced to a “ ‘farce or a sham.’ ” (People v. Ibarra (1963) 60 Cal.2d 460, 464 [ 34 Cal.Rptr. 863 , 386 P.2d 487 ]; see also People v. Reeves (1966) 64 Cal.2d 766 [ 51 Cal.Rptr. 691 , 415 P.2d 35 ].) It is conceded, of course, that a trial without error is not the standard.	1	1
People v. Ohmangreen calctapp · 1945 · cited in 1 California opinions naming this issue, 1947–1947 2 sentences 1947(People v. Ohman, 67 Cal.App.2d 467, 476 [ 154 P.2d 463 ].) The court was without error in admitting evidence of the confession prior to proof of the corpus delicti. 1947(People v. Ohman, 67 Cal.App.2d 467, 476 [ 154 P.2d 463 ].) The court was without error in admitting evidence of the confession prior to proof of the corpus delicti.	1	1

Distinguished, questioned or overruled (0)

Case	Negative	Cited
No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in California. Read the followed side critically anyway.

Also cited on this issue (16)

Case	Cited	Years
Reinagel v. Deutsche Bank National Trust Co. green ca5 · 2013 2 sentences 2015(Reinagel v. Deutsche Bank National Trust Co. (5th Cir. 2013) 722 F.3d 700, 705 .) But no California court has followed Glaski on this point, and many have pointedly rejected it. 2015(Id. at pp. 1095-1098; Reinagel v. Deutsche Bank Nat’l Trust Co. (5th Cir.Tex.2013) 722 F.3d 700, 705 .) No California court has followed Glaski on this point, and many have disagreed with it.	4	2014–2015
People v. Becerra green cal · 2016 1 sentence 2024(Cf. People v. Becerra, supra, 63 Cal.4th at pp. 514- 516, 518 [reversing revocation of pro per status when the trial court without warning revoked the defendant’s pro per rights].) It was not unreasonable for the court to therefore conclude that Fink’s conduct would continue at trial and threaten the fairness of the proceedings.	1	2024–2024
Chapman v. California red scotus · 1967 2 sentences 2022When jury instructions are deficient for omitting an element of an offense, they implicate the defendant’s federal constitutional rights, and we review for harmless error under the strict 15 standard of Chapman v. California (1967) 386 U.S. 18 , 87 S.Ct. 824 , 17 L.Ed.2d 705 (Chapman). [Citations.]” (People v. Sek (2022) 74 Cal.App.5th 657 , 668.) “Under the Chapman standard, reversal is required unless ‘it appears beyond a reasonable doubt that the error did not contribute to th[e] jury’s verdict.’ [Citation.]” (Ibid.) The issue is not whether, in a trial without the error, a guilty verdict w 2022When jury instructions are deficient for omitting an element of an offense, they implicate the defendant’s federal constitutional rights, and we review for harmless error under the strict 15 standard of Chapman v. California (1967) 386 U.S. 18 , 87 S.Ct. 824 , 17 L.Ed.2d 705 (Chapman). [Citations.]” (People v. Sek (2022) 74 Cal.App.5th 657 , 668.) “Under the Chapman standard, reversal is required unless ‘it appears beyond a reasonable doubt that the error did not contribute to th[e] jury’s verdict.’ [Citation.]” (Ibid.) The issue is not whether, in a trial without the error, a guilty verdict w	1	2022–2022
United States v. Allied Oil Corp. green scotus · 1951 1 sentence 2018Acknowledging that a bail scheme that "might operate unconstitutionally under some conceivable set of circumstances is insufficient to render it wholly invalid" ( United States v. Salerno (1987) 481 U.S. 739 , 745, 107 S.Ct. 2095 , 95 L.Ed.2d 697 ) ( Salerno ), petitioner does not claim California's money bail system is facially unconstitutional.	1	2018–2018
People v. Thomas green calctapp · 2007 1 sentence 2013In People v. Thomas (2007) 146 Cal.App.4th 1278 , the court rejected the People's argument that battery is not a lesser included offense.	1	2013–2013
People v. Abdul Y. green calctapp · 1982 1 sentence 1985(Kohn v. Superior Court (1966) 239 Cal.App.2d 428, 430 [ 48 Cal.Rptr. 832 ].) Thus the 1965 “addition preserves the right of a party to disqualify a judge under Code of Civil Procedure section 170.6 notwithstanding the fact the judge had heard and determined an earlier demurrer or motion, or other matter not involving ‘contested fact issues’ relating ‘to the merits’ without challenge in the same cause.” {In re Jose S., supra, 78 Cal.App.3d at p. 626 .) If, on the other hand, the judge has presided at a prior, pretrial hearing involving a contested issue of fact relating to the merits, a subseq	1	1985–1985
People v. Montalvo green calctapp · 1981 2 sentences 1985(In re Abdul Y., supra, 130 Cal.App.3d at pp. 858-859, fn. 9, citing People v. Montalvo (1981) 117 Cal.App.3d 790 [ 173 Cal.Rptr. 51 ] (plea bargain); In re Jose S., supra, 78 Cal.App.3d 619 (in chambers review of polygraph report); People v. Hunter (1977) 71 Cal.App.3d 634 [ 139 Cal.Rptr. 560 ] (motion to amend information); Los Angeles County Dept. of Pub. 1985(In re Abdul Y., supra, 130 Cal.App.3d at pp. 858-859, fn. 9, citing People v. Montalvo (1981) 117 Cal.App.3d 790 [ 173 Cal.Rptr. 51 ] (plea bargain); In re Jose S., supra, 78 Cal.App.3d 619 (in chambers review of polygraph report); People v. Hunter (1977) 71 Cal.App.3d 634 [ 139 Cal.Rptr. 560 ] (motion to amend information); Los Angeles County Dept. of Pub.	1	1985–1985
People v. Hunter green calctapp · 1977 2 sentences 1985(In re Abdul Y., supra, 130 Cal.App.3d at pp. 858-859, fn. 9, citing People v. Montalvo (1981) 117 Cal.App.3d 790 [ 173 Cal.Rptr. 51 ] (plea bargain); In re Jose S., supra, 78 Cal.App.3d 619 (in chambers review of polygraph report); People v. Hunter (1977) 71 Cal.App.3d 634 [ 139 Cal.Rptr. 560 ] (motion to amend information); Los Angeles County Dept. of Pub. 1985(In re Abdul Y., supra, 130 Cal.App.3d at pp. 858-859, fn. 9, citing People v. Montalvo (1981) 117 Cal.App.3d 790 [ 173 Cal.Rptr. 51 ] (plea bargain); In re Jose S., supra, 78 Cal.App.3d 619 (in chambers review of polygraph report); People v. Hunter (1977) 71 Cal.App.3d 634 [ 139 Cal.Rptr. 560 ] (motion to amend information); Los Angeles County Dept. of Pub.	1	1985–1985
In Re Saunders green cal · 1970 2 sentences 1978(In re Saunders (1970) 2 Cal.3d 1033 [ 88 Cal.Rptr. 633 , 472 P.2d 921 ].) It is also acknowledged that an unfortunate choice of trial strategy by defense counsel will not, in and of itself, constitute an inadequacy that mandates a reversal of defendant’s conviction. 1978(In re Saunders (1970) 2 Cal.3d 1033 [ 88 Cal.Rptr. 633 , 472 P.2d 921 ].) It is also acknowledged that an unfortunate choice of trial strategy by defense counsel will not, in and of itself, constitute an inadequacy that mandates a reversal of defendant’s conviction.	1	1978–1978
Magezis v. Municipal Court green cal · 1970 2 sentences 1972This application was denied by the trial court without a hearing on the dual grounds that petitioners were not entitled to a transcript because they had not met their burden under Magezis v. Municipal Court, 3 Cal.3d 54 [ 88 Cal.Rptr. 713 , 473 P.2d 353 ] and 426 because they were not indigent. 1972This application was denied by the trial court without a hearing on the dual grounds that petitioners were not entitled to a transcript because they had not met their burden under Magezis v. Municipal Court, 3 Cal.3d 54 [ 88 Cal.Rptr. 713 , 473 P.2d 353 ] and 426 because they were not indigent.	1	1972–1972
Mayer v. City of Chicago green scotus · 1971 2 sentences 1972We conclude that a new .hearing on the motion is required since Magezis has been effectively overruled by the recent United States Supreme Court decision in Mayer v. City of Chicago, 404 U.S. 189 [ 30 L.Ed.2d 372 , 92 S.Ct. 410 ], and since the trial court included irrelevant factors in its determination of nonindigency. 1972We conclude that a new .hearing on the motion is required since Magezis has been effectively overruled by the recent United States Supreme Court decision in Mayer v. City of Chicago, 404 U.S. 189 [ 30 L.Ed.2d 372 , 92 S.Ct. 410 ], and since the trial court included irrelevant factors in its determination of nonindigency.	1	1972–1972
Greyhound Corp. v. Superior Court green cal · 1961 1 sentence 1962If, on the other hand, he was collecting information in the regular course of business, the fact that a copy of his report was ultimately transmitted to the attorney could not have the effect of creating a privilege where none previously existed (Greyhound Corp. v. Superior Court, supra, 56 Cal.2d 355 , and cases cited therein at p. 397).	1	1962–1962
People v. Norton green calctapp · 1941 2 sentences 1945Not only was it within the discretion of the trial court to deny the motion for a new trial without hearing argument thereon (People v. Norton, 45 Cal.App.2d 789 [ 115 P.2d 44 ]), but counsel for the appellant had then had more than two weeks after the verdict was rendered, and it is not even contended that a later date would have enabled them to raise points or reasons for a new trial which were not then available to them. 1945Not only was it within the discretion of the trial court to deny the motion for a new trial without hearing argument thereon (People v. Norton, 45 Cal.App.2d 789 [ 115 P.2d 44 ]), but counsel for the appellant had then had more than two weeks after the verdict was rendered, and it is not even contended that a later date would have enabled them to raise points or reasons for a new trial which were not then available to them.	1	1945–1945
Union Electric Co. v. Coale green · 1941 1 sentence 1941As the result of these pertinent observations, the limitations of the holding in Union Electric Company of Missouri v. Coale, supra, in so far as they reflect on the present case, must be recognized.	1	1941–1941
People v. Reid green cal · 1924 1 sentence 1932R. 1435, 232 Pac. 457 ].) We have reached the conclusion that the order denying defendant’s motion for a new trial is without error.	1	1932–1932
Williams v. Harter green cal · 1898 2 sentences 1919In Williams v. Harter, 121 Cal. 47, 52 , [ 53 Pac. 405 ], the appellant made the point that the trial court arbitrarily denied his motion for a new trial without hearing or considering the grounds urged in support thereof. 1919In Williams v. Harter, 121 Cal. 47, 52 , [ 53 Pac. 405 ], the appellant made the point that the trial court arbitrarily denied his motion for a new trial without hearing or considering the grounds urged in support thereof.	1	1919–1919

Where else courts name it

IL 47 (1922–2026) AL 33 (1872–2016) TX 26 (1910–2025) FL 23 (1933–2024) OH 22 (1992–2026) UT 22 (1983–2026) CA 20 (1919–2024) NY 18 (1873–2016) ID 18 (1926–2024) TN 15 (1965–2021) WA 15 (1911–2024) GA 14 (1925–2026) MI 13 (1928–2015) PA 13 (1869–2017) MA 13 (1914–2025) OK 10 (1910–2021) CO 10 (1959–2024) DC 9 (1977–2020) NE 8 (1884–1987) MT 8 (1994–2012) LA 7 (1931–2015) AZ 7 (1970–2020) VA 6 (1928–2002) RI 6 (1984–2003) VT 5 (1945–2025) WV 5 (2006–2025) SC 5 (1957–1978) MS 5 (1911–2019) MD 3 (1940–2014) IN 3 (1945–2014) MO 3 (1979–1996) WY 3 (1931–1999) OR 3 (1962–2012) KY 3 (1912–1922) CT 3 (1999–2025) NC 3 (1990–1992) WI 3 (1891–2018) MN 3 (1897–1989) IA 3 (1865–2017) ND 2 (1953–1956) NH 2 (1889–1982) KS 2 (2022–2022)

Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.

← Caselaw search · G Cite Topics · Brief Check