Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
12 California opinions name it 2 courts 1927–2020 0 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.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
People v. Mooregreen2 sentences1984"To hold that police officers should in the proper discharge of their duties detain and question all persons in that location or all those who act nervous at the approach of officers would for practical purposes involve an abrogation of the rule requiring substantial circumstances to justify the detention and questioning of persons on the street." ( People v. Moore (1968) 69 Cal.2d 674, 683 [ 72 Cal. Rptr. 800 , 446 P.2d 800 ].) The departure of defendant and others from an imminent intrusion cannot bootstrap an illegal detention into one that is legal. 1984"To hold that police officers should in the proper discharge of their duties detain and question all persons in that location or all those who act nervous at the approach of officers would for practical purposes involve an abrogation of the rule requiring substantial circumstances to justify the detention and questioning of persons on the street." ( People v. Moore (1968) 69 Cal.2d 674, 683 [ 72 Cal. Rptr. 800 , 446 P.2d 800 ].) The departure of defendant and others from an imminent intrusion cannot bootstrap an illegal detention into one that is legal. | 2 | 3 |
Cunha v. Superior Courtgreen2 sentences1978A day-old burglary report does not transform a residential neighborhood into a no man's land in which any passerby is fair game for a roving police interrogation: "To hold that police officers should in the proper discharge of their duties detain and question all persons in that location ... would for practical purposes involve an abrogation of the rule requiring substantial circumstances to justify the detention and questioning of persons on the street." ( People v. Moore (1968) supra, 69 Cal.2d 674, 683 ; accord, Cunha v. Superior Court (1970) 2 Cal.3d 352 , 357 & fn. 1 [ 85 Cal. Rptr. 160 , 1978A day-old burglary report does not transform a residential neighborhood into a no man's land in which any passerby is fair game for a roving police interrogation: "To hold that police officers should in the proper discharge of their duties detain and question all persons in that location ... would for practical purposes involve an abrogation of the rule requiring substantial circumstances to justify the detention and questioning of persons on the street." ( People v. Moore (1968) supra, 69 Cal.2d 674, 683 ; accord, Cunha v. Superior Court (1970) 2 Cal.3d 352 , 357 & fn. 1 [ 85 Cal. Rptr. 160 , | 1 | 2 |
People v. Hacklergreen1 sentence2020(People v. Dagostino (2004) 117 Cal.App.4th 974 , 996–998; People v. Dixon (2003) 113 Cal.App.4th 146 , 150–151; see also People v. Connors (2016) 3 Cal.App.5th 729 , 734–736 [declining to follow People v. Hackler (1993) 13 Cal.App.4th 1049, 1057 , which had considered validity of probation condition imposed at original sentencing hearing in a subsequent probation revocation hearing, noting that subsequent developments in the law barred such challenges].) 10 III. | 1 | 1 |
People v. Connorsgreen1 sentence2020(People v. Dagostino (2004) 117 Cal.App.4th 974 , 996–998; People v. Dixon (2003) 113 Cal.App.4th 146 , 150–151; see also People v. Connors (2016) 3 Cal.App.5th 729 , 734–736 [declining to follow People v. Hackler (1993) 13 Cal.App.4th 1049, 1057 , which had considered validity of probation condition imposed at original sentencing hearing in a subsequent probation revocation hearing, noting that subsequent developments in the law barred such challenges].) 10 III. | 1 | 1 |
People v. Gutierrezgreen2 sentences2012Section 781, supra, was conceived for the purpose of extending the lines of jurisdiction beyond the limits fixed by the common law and thus forestall the technical rule relating to venue in multiple element offenses. [Citation.] Under the current rule where only a part of a crime has been committed in one county and the other part or parts have been committed in another, venue lies where only a part of the crime was done.” (People v. Waid (1954) 127 Cal.App.2d 614, 617 [ 274 P.2d 217 ]; see Annot., Construction and Effect of Statutes Providing for Venue of Criminal Case in Either County, Where 2012Section 781, supra, was conceived for the purpose of extending the lines of jurisdiction beyond the limits fixed by the common law and thus forestall the technical rule relating to venue in multiple element offenses. [Citation.] Under the current rule where only a part of a crime has been committed in one county and the other part or parts have been committed in another, venue lies where only a part of the crime was done.” (People v. Waid (1954) 127 Cal.App.2d 614, 617 [ 274 P.2d 217 ]; see Annot., Construction and Effect of Statutes Providing for Venue of Criminal Case in Either County, Where | 1 | 1 |
People v. Waidgreen2 sentences2012Section 781, supra, was conceived for the purpose of extending the lines of jurisdiction beyond the limits fixed by the common law and thus forestall the technical rule relating to venue in multiple element offenses. [Citation.] Under the current rule where only a part of a crime has been committed in one county and the other part or parts have been committed in another, venue lies where only a part of the crime was done.” (People v. Waid (1954) 127 Cal.App.2d 614, 617 [ 274 P.2d 217 ]; see Annot., Construction and Effect of Statutes Providing for Venue of Criminal Case in Either County, Where 2012Section 781, supra, was conceived for the purpose of extending the lines of jurisdiction beyond the limits fixed by the common law and thus forestall the technical rule relating to venue in multiple element offenses. [Citation.] Under the current rule where only a part of a crime has been committed in one county and the other part or parts have been committed in another, venue lies where only a part of the crime was done.” (People v. Waid (1954) 127 Cal.App.2d 614, 617 [ 274 P.2d 217 ]; see Annot., Construction and Effect of Statutes Providing for Venue of Criminal Case in Either County, Where | 1 | 1 |
People v. Lawlergreen1 sentence1983Nervousness in the presence of a police officer does not furnish a reasonable basis for a detention, especially where, as here, it “could understandably result from . . . police questioning because of a ‘traffic violation.’” (People v. Lawler, supra, 9 Cal.3d at p. 162, fn. omitted.) As this court has observed, “[t]o hold that police officers should in the proper discharge of their duties detain and question ... all those who act nervous at the approach of officers would for practical purposes involve an abrogation of the rule requiring substantial circumstances to justify the detention and qu | 1 | 1 |
People v. Bowergreen1 sentence1983Nervousness in the presence of a police officer does not furnish a reasonable basis for a detention, especially where, as here, it “could understandably result from . . . police questioning because of a ‘traffic violation.’” (People v. Lawler, supra, 9 Cal.3d at p. 162, fn. omitted.) As this court has observed, “[t]o hold that police officers should in the proper discharge of their duties detain and question ... all those who act nervous at the approach of officers would for practical purposes involve an abrogation of the rule requiring substantial circumstances to justify the detention and qu | 1 | 1 |
People v. Leybagreen1 sentence1983Nervousness in the presence of a police officer does not furnish a reasonable basis for a detention, especially where, as here, it “could understandably result from . . . police questioning because of a ‘traffic violation.’” (People v. Lawler, supra, 9 Cal.3d at p. 162, fn. omitted.) As this court has observed, “[t]o hold that police officers should in the proper discharge of their duties detain and question ... all those who act nervous at the approach of officers would for practical purposes involve an abrogation of the rule requiring substantial circumstances to justify the detention and qu | 1 | 1 |
Chase Securities Corp. v. Donaldsongreen2 sentences1962(See Campbell v. Holt, 115 U.S. 620 , 628 *465 [ 6 S.Ct. 209 , 29 L.Ed. 483 ] ; Chase Securities Corp. v. Donaldson, 325 U.S. 304, 315-316 [ 65 S.Ct. 1137 , 89 L.Ed. 1628 ].) He also contends that the act adequately protects Douglas from the risk of double liability and that there are no special circumstances in this case that would make the abrogation of the defense of the statute of limitations a denial of due process to Douglas. 1962(See Campbell v. Holt, 115 U.S. 620 , 628 *465 [ 6 S.Ct. 209 , 29 L.Ed. 483 ] ; Chase Securities Corp. v. Donaldson, 325 U.S. 304, 315-316 [ 65 S.Ct. 1137 , 89 L.Ed. 1628 ].) He also contends that the act adequately protects Douglas from the risk of double liability and that there are no special circumstances in this case that would make the abrogation of the defense of the statute of limitations a denial of due process to Douglas. | 1 | 1 |
Barnett v. Barnettgreen2 sentences1927Therefore, by virtue of such decisions as Barnett v. Barnett, 104 Cal. 298, 301 [ 37 Pac. 1049 ], the words must be held to designate a class only and, so designating, the class take equally and not per stirpes. 1927Therefore, by virtue of such decisions as Barnett v. Barnett, 104 Cal. 298, 301 [ 37 Pac. 1049 ], the words must be held to designate a class only and, so designating, the class take equally and not per stirpes. | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in California. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
People v. Dagostino
green
1 sentence2020(People v. Dagostino (2004) 117 Cal.App.4th 974 , 996–998; People v. Dixon (2003) 113 Cal.App.4th 146 , 150–151; see also People v. Connors (2016) 3 Cal.App.5th 729 , 734–736 [declining to follow People v. Hackler (1993) 13 Cal.App.4th 1049, 1057 , which had considered validity of probation condition imposed at original sentencing hearing in a subsequent probation revocation hearing, noting that subsequent developments in the law barred such challenges].) 10 III. | 1 | 2020–2020 |
People v. Dixon
green
1 sentence2020(People v. Dagostino (2004) 117 Cal.App.4th 974 , 996–998; People v. Dixon (2003) 113 Cal.App.4th 146 , 150–151; see also People v. Connors (2016) 3 Cal.App.5th 729 , 734–736 [declining to follow People v. Hackler (1993) 13 Cal.App.4th 1049, 1057 , which had considered validity of probation condition imposed at original sentencing hearing in a subsequent probation revocation hearing, noting that subsequent developments in the law barred such challenges].) 10 III. | 1 | 2020–2020 |
People v. Loewen
green
1 sentence2016“Nervousness in the presence of a police officer does not furnish a reasonable basis for a detention . . . . [Citation.] As [the California Supreme Court] has observed, ‘[t]o hold that police officers should in the proper discharge of their duties detain and question . . . all those who act nervous at the approach of officers would for practical purposes involve an abrogation of the rule requiring substantial circumstances to justify the detention and questioning of persons on the street.’” (People v. Loewen (1983) 35 Cal.3d 117, 125 .) Agent Sandoval’s conduct here — pulling alongside defenda | 1 | 2016–2016 |
People v. Valenzuela
green
1 sentence2016“Failure to meet the border agent’s gaze, and kneading of the 8 steering wheel, even if indicative of nervousness, does not provide a sufficient reason to suspect defendant was in the country illegally or doing anything else illegal. [Citation.] Anyone — undocumented aliens, legal resident aliens, or citizens alike — could easily be apprehensive of a series of forced encounters with uniformed authority figures.” (People v. Valenzuela (1994) 28 Cal.App.4th 817, 828 .) As another court noted, “it is a common, if not universal, practice for drivers and passengers alike to take note of a law enfor | 1 | 2016–2016 |
Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians v. Superior Court
green
1 sentence2008Both the United States Supreme Court (see Kiowa, supra, 523 U.S. at p. 760 ; Potawatomi, supra, 498 U.S. at p. 514 ) and the California Supreme Court (see Agua Caliente, supra, 40 Cal.4th at pp. 260-261) have cautioned against such a broad abrogation of the doctrine of tribal sovereign immunity. | 1 | 2008–2008 |
Oklahoma Tax Comm'n v. Citizen Band of Potawatomi Tribe of Okla.
green
1 sentence2008Both the United States Supreme Court (see Kiowa, supra, 523 U.S. at p. 760 ; Potawatomi, supra, 498 U.S. at p. 514 ) and the California Supreme Court (see Agua Caliente, supra, 40 Cal.4th at pp. 260-261) have cautioned against such a broad abrogation of the doctrine of tribal sovereign immunity. | 1 | 2008–2008 |
Kiowa Tribe of Oklahoma v. Manufacturing Technologies, Inc.
green
1 sentence2008Both the United States Supreme Court (see Kiowa, supra, 523 U.S. at p. 760 ; Potawatomi, supra, 498 U.S. at p. 514 ) and the California Supreme Court (see Agua Caliente, supra, 40 Cal.4th at pp. 260-261) have cautioned against such a broad abrogation of the doctrine of tribal sovereign immunity. | 1 | 2008–2008 |
Muskopf v. Corning Hospital District
red
2 sentences1965Government Code section 955.2 was enacted in 1963 as an integral part of the comprehensive legislative review of governmental tort liability problems required by the abrogation of the doctrine of sovereign immunity announced in Muskopf v. Corning Hospital Dist., 55 Cal.2d 211 [ 11 Cal.Rptr. 89 , 359 P.2d 457 ]. 1965Government Code section 955.2 was enacted in 1963 as an integral part of the comprehensive legislative review of governmental tort liability problems required by the abrogation of the doctrine of sovereign immunity announced in Muskopf v. Corning Hospital Dist., 55 Cal.2d 211 [ 11 Cal.Rptr. 89 , 359 P.2d 457 ]. | 1 | 1965–1965 |
Campbell v. Holt
green
2 sentences1962(See Campbell v. Holt, 115 U.S. 620 , 628 *465 [ 6 S.Ct. 209 , 29 L.Ed. 483 ] ; Chase Securities Corp. v. Donaldson, 325 U.S. 304, 315-316 [ 65 S.Ct. 1137 , 89 L.Ed. 1628 ].) He also contends that the act adequately protects Douglas from the risk of double liability and that there are no special circumstances in this case that would make the abrogation of the defense of the statute of limitations a denial of due process to Douglas. 1962(See Campbell v. Holt, 115 U.S. 620 , 628 *465 [ 6 S.Ct. 209 , 29 L.Ed. 483 ] ; Chase Securities Corp. v. Donaldson, 325 U.S. 304, 315-316 [ 65 S.Ct. 1137 , 89 L.Ed. 1628 ].) He also contends that the act adequately protects Douglas from the risk of double liability and that there are no special circumstances in this case that would make the abrogation of the defense of the statute of limitations a denial of due process to Douglas. | 1 | 1962–1962 |
Salisbury v. Yawger
green
2 sentences1929It would be opening the door to its evasion, so that it would lose all its vitality and virtue.’ The decision goes on: ‘I think this is the spirit of all the authorities, and that the honesty and fairness of transactions between principals and their agents demand a firm adherence to these rules, and to bring under their operation, not only the agent himself, but those in his immediate employ, and who are engaged in the transaction of his business, which is, necessarily, the business of the agent’s principal.’ ” (Italics ours.) These principles are cited with approval in the cases of Newell-Mur 1929It would be opening the door to its evasion, so that it would lose all its vitality and virtue.’ The decision goes on: ‘I think this is the spirit of all the authorities, and that the honesty and fairness of transactions between principals and their agents demand a firm adherence to these rules, and to bring under their operation, not only the agent himself, but those in his immediate employ, and who are engaged in the transaction of his business, which is, necessarily, the business of the agent’s principal.’ ” (Italics ours.) These principles are cited with approval in the cases of Newell-Mur | 1 | 1929–1929 |
Newell-Murdoch Realty Co. v. Wickham
green
2 sentences1929It would be opening the door to its evasion, so that it would lose all its vitality and virtue.’ The decision goes on: ‘I think this is the spirit of all the authorities, and that the honesty and fairness of transactions between principals and their agents demand a firm adherence to these rules, and to bring under their operation, not only the agent himself, but those in his immediate employ, and who are engaged in the transaction of his business, which is, necessarily, the business of the agent’s principal.’ ” (Italics ours.) These principles are cited with approval in the cases of Newell-Mur 1929It would be opening the door to its evasion, so that it would lose all its vitality and virtue.’ The decision goes on: ‘I think this is the spirit of all the authorities, and that the honesty and fairness of transactions between principals and their agents demand a firm adherence to these rules, and to bring under their operation, not only the agent himself, but those in his immediate employ, and who are engaged in the transaction of his business, which is, necessarily, the business of the agent’s principal.’ ” (Italics ours.) These principles are cited with approval in the cases of Newell-Mur | 1 | 1929–1929 |
Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.
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.