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.
11 California opinions name it 2 courts 1969–2020 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. Reevesgreen2 sentences1970(See People v. Reeves (1966) 64 Cal.2d 766, 772-775 [ 51 Cal.Rptr. 691 , 415 P.2d 35 [; People v. Robillard (1960) 55 Cal.2d 88, 96-98 [ 10 Cal.Rptr. 167 , 358 P.2d 295 , 83 A.L.R.2d 1086 ]; People v. Glover (1967) 257 Cal.App.2d 502, 507-509 [ 65 Cal.Rptr. 219 ].) When, however, the knowledge necessary to an informed tactical or strategic decision is absent because of counsel’s ineptitude or lack of industry, no such ground of justification is possible. 1970(See People v. Reeves (1966) 64 Cal.2d 766, 772-775 [ 51 Cal.Rptr. 691 , 415 P.2d 35 [; People v. Robillard (1960) 55 Cal.2d 88, 96-98 [ 10 Cal.Rptr. 167 , 358 P.2d 295 , 83 A.L.R.2d 1086 ]; People v. Glover (1967) 257 Cal.App.2d 502, 507-509 [ 65 Cal.Rptr. 219 ].) When, however, the knowledge necessary to an informed tactical or strategic decision is absent because of counsel’s ineptitude or lack of industry, no such ground of justification is possible. | 2 | 2 |
People v. Robillardgreen2 sentences1970(See People v. Reeves (1966) 64 Cal.2d 766, 772-775 [ 51 Cal.Rptr. 691 , 415 P.2d 35 [; People v. Robillard (1960) 55 Cal.2d 88, 96-98 [ 10 Cal.Rptr. 167 , 358 P.2d 295 , 83 A.L.R.2d 1086 ]; People v. Glover (1967) 257 Cal.App.2d 502, 507-509 [ 65 Cal.Rptr. 219 ].) When, however, the knowledge necessary to an informed tactical or strategic decision is absent because of counsel’s ineptitude or lack of industry, no such ground of justification is possible. 1970(See People v. Reeves (1966) 64 Cal.2d 766, 772-775 [ 51 Cal.Rptr. 691 , 415 P.2d 35 [; People v. Robillard (1960) 55 Cal.2d 88, 96-98 [ 10 Cal.Rptr. 167 , 358 P.2d 295 , 83 A.L.R.2d 1086 ]; People v. Glover (1967) 257 Cal.App.2d 502, 507-509 [ 65 Cal.Rptr. 219 ].) When, however, the knowledge necessary to an informed tactical or strategic decision is absent because of counsel’s ineptitude or lack of industry, no such ground of justification is possible. | 2 | 2 |
People v. Glovergreen2 sentences1970(See People v. Reeves (1966) 64 Cal.2d 766, 772-775 [ 51 Cal.Rptr. 691 , 415 P.2d 35 [; People v. Robillard (1960) 55 Cal.2d 88, 96-98 [ 10 Cal.Rptr. 167 , 358 P.2d 295 , 83 A.L.R.2d 1086 ]; People v. Glover (1967) 257 Cal.App.2d 502, 507-509 [ 65 Cal.Rptr. 219 ].) When, however, the knowledge necessary to an informed tactical or strategic decision is absent because of counsel’s ineptitude or lack of industry, no such ground of justification is possible. 1970(See People v. Reeves (1966) 64 Cal.2d 766, 772-775 [ 51 Cal.Rptr. 691 , 415 P.2d 35 [; People v. Robillard (1960) 55 Cal.2d 88, 96-98 [ 10 Cal.Rptr. 167 , 358 P.2d 295 , 83 A.L.R.2d 1086 ]; People v. Glover (1967) 257 Cal.App.2d 502, 507-509 [ 65 Cal.Rptr. 219 ].) When, however, the knowledge necessary to an informed tactical or strategic decision is absent because of counsel’s ineptitude or lack of industry, no such ground of justification is possible. | 2 | 2 |
In Re GAULTgreen2 sentences1969Implicit in this point is a major premise that the right to counsel in juvenile proceedings, recognized in In re Gault 387 U.S. 1, 34-42 [ 18 L.Ed.2d 527, 550-554 , 87 S.Ct. 1428 ], must be retroactively applied. 3. 1969Implicit in this point is a major premise that the right to counsel in juvenile proceedings, recognized in In re Gault 387 U.S. 1, 34-42 [ 18 L.Ed.2d 527, 550-554 , 87 S.Ct. 1428 ], must be retroactively applied. 3. | 2 | 2 |
People v. Wrestgreen2 sentences2017The Attorney General's argument finds some support in our statement in Wrest , supra , 3 Cal.4th 1088 , 13 Cal.Rptr.2d 511 , 839 P.2d 1020 , that Memro "simply requires that a valid waiver of the jury-trial right on a special circumstance actually cover the special circumstance." ( Wrest , at p. 1105, 13 Cal.Rptr.2d 511 , 839 P.2d 1020 .) Arguably, our conclusion that the trial court secured a constitutionally adequate waiver of a jury trial concerning the special circumstance allegation could be equated with a determination that defendant's waiver covered the charge, in the sense that it enco 2017The Attorney General's argument finds some support in our statement in Wrest , supra , 3 Cal.4th 1088 , 13 Cal.Rptr.2d 511 , 839 P.2d 1020 , that Memro "simply requires that a valid waiver of the jury-trial right on a special circumstance actually cover the special circumstance." ( Wrest , at p. 1105, 13 Cal.Rptr.2d 511 , 839 P.2d 1020 .) Arguably, our conclusion that the trial court secured a constitutionally adequate waiver of a jury trial concerning the special circumstance allegation could be equated with a determination that defendant's waiver covered the charge, in the sense that it enco | 1 | 1 |
People v. Williamsgreen2 sentences2009Because the question of whether defendant’s sentence amounted to cruel or unusual punishment is a question of law (see People v. Williams (1986) 180 Cal.App.3d 922, 926 [ 225 Cal.Rptr. 842 ]), we can “apply[] the correct standard” just as well as the trial court could. 2009Because the question of whether defendant’s sentence amounted to cruel or unusual punishment is a question of law (see People v. Williams (1986) 180 Cal.App.3d 922, 926 [ 225 Cal.Rptr. 842 ]), we can “apply[] the correct standard” just as well as the trial court could. | 1 | 1 |
Glendale Memorial Hospital & Health Center v. State Department of Mental Healthgreen2 sentences2008(Sinaiko v. Superior Court, supra, 122 Cal.App.4th at p. 1142 ; Glendale Memorial Hospital & Health Center v. State Dept. of Mental Health (2001) 91 Cal.App.4th 129, 140 [ 110 Cal.Rptr.2d 101 ].) *716 V Board’s Jurisdiction on Remand MHC claims the Board lacks authority to apply judicial doctrines to determine the nature of the tenancies or decide whether tenants relied on oral representations about the leases. 2008(Sinaiko v. Superior Court, supra, 122 Cal.App.4th at p. 1142 ; Glendale Memorial Hospital & Health Center v. State Dept. of Mental Health (2001) 91 Cal.App.4th 129, 140 [ 110 Cal.Rptr.2d 101 ].) *716 V Board’s Jurisdiction on Remand MHC claims the Board lacks authority to apply judicial doctrines to determine the nature of the tenancies or decide whether tenants relied on oral representations about the leases. | 1 | 1 |
In Re Saundersgreen2 sentences1977A petition for a rehearing was denied October 27, 1977, and appellant’s petition for a hearing by the Supreme Court was denied January 5, 1978. 1 In a footnote it is stated: “Cases involving a failure to make those careful factual and legal inquiries and investigations necessary to a constitutionally adequate defense are to be distinguished, of course, from cases wherein counsel, having made such inquiries .and investigations, makes tactical or strategic decisions — whether wise ■ or unwise when viewed with the benefit of hindsight — which cause him not to utilize the fruits of his labors. [Ci 1977A petition for a rehearing was denied October 27, 1977, and appellant’s petition for a hearing by the Supreme Court was denied January 5, 1978. 1 In a footnote it is stated: “Cases involving a failure to make those careful factual and legal inquiries and investigations necessary to a constitutionally adequate defense are to be distinguished, of course, from cases wherein counsel, having made such inquiries .and investigations, makes tactical or strategic decisions — whether wise ■ or unwise when viewed with the benefit of hindsight — which cause him not to utilize the fruits of his labors. [Ci | 1 | 1 |
Gouled v. United Statesgreen2 sentences1970Of course where an entry obtained by trickery brings officers into a room where they have no right to be and they then observe contraband in plain sight or conduct a search (People v. Reeves, 61 Cal.2d 268, 273 [ 38 Cal.Rptr. 1 , 391 P.2d 393 ]; People v. Miller, 248 Cal.App.2d 731, 736-740 [ 56 Cal.Rptr. 865 ]; cf. Gouled v. United States, 255 U.S. 298, 304-306 [ 65 L.Ed. 647, 650-651 , 41 S.Ct. 261 ]) the seizure of whatever is seen or found is the immediate product of the ruse, Nothing of the kind can be said in the case at bar, at least as a matter of law on a motion to set aside the infor 1970Of course where an entry obtained by trickery brings officers into a room where they have no right to be and they then observe contraband in plain sight or conduct a search (People v. Reeves, 61 Cal.2d 268, 273 [ 38 Cal.Rptr. 1 , 391 P.2d 393 ]; People v. Miller, 248 Cal.App.2d 731, 736-740 [ 56 Cal.Rptr. 865 ]; cf. Gouled v. United States, 255 U.S. 298, 304-306 [ 65 L.Ed. 647, 650-651 , 41 S.Ct. 261 ]) the seizure of whatever is seen or found is the immediate product of the ruse, Nothing of the kind can be said in the case at bar, at least as a matter of law on a motion to set aside the infor | 1 | 1 |
People v. Reevesgreen2 sentences1970Of course where an entry obtained by trickery brings officers into a room where they have no right to be and they then observe contraband in plain sight or conduct a search (People v. Reeves, 61 Cal.2d 268, 273 [ 38 Cal.Rptr. 1 , 391 P.2d 393 ]; People v. Miller, 248 Cal.App.2d 731, 736-740 [ 56 Cal.Rptr. 865 ]; cf. Gouled v. United States, 255 U.S. 298, 304-306 [ 65 L.Ed. 647, 650-651 , 41 S.Ct. 261 ]) the seizure of whatever is seen or found is the immediate product of the ruse, Nothing of the kind can be said in the case at bar, at least as a matter of law on a motion to set aside the infor 1970Of course where an entry obtained by trickery brings officers into a room where they have no right to be and they then observe contraband in plain sight or conduct a search (People v. Reeves, 61 Cal.2d 268, 273 [ 38 Cal.Rptr. 1 , 391 P.2d 393 ]; People v. Miller, 248 Cal.App.2d 731, 736-740 [ 56 Cal.Rptr. 865 ]; cf. Gouled v. United States, 255 U.S. 298, 304-306 [ 65 L.Ed. 647, 650-651 , 41 S.Ct. 261 ]) the seizure of whatever is seen or found is the immediate product of the ruse, Nothing of the kind can be said in the case at bar, at least as a matter of law on a motion to set aside the infor | 1 | 1 |
People v. Millergreen2 sentences1970Of course where an entry obtained by trickery brings officers into a room where they have no right to be and they then observe contraband in plain sight or conduct a search (People v. Reeves, 61 Cal.2d 268, 273 [ 38 Cal.Rptr. 1 , 391 P.2d 393 ]; People v. Miller, 248 Cal.App.2d 731, 736-740 [ 56 Cal.Rptr. 865 ]; cf. Gouled v. United States, 255 U.S. 298, 304-306 [ 65 L.Ed. 647, 650-651 , 41 S.Ct. 261 ]) the seizure of whatever is seen or found is the immediate product of the ruse, Nothing of the kind can be said in the case at bar, at least as a matter of law on a motion to set aside the infor 1970Of course where an entry obtained by trickery brings officers into a room where they have no right to be and they then observe contraband in plain sight or conduct a search (People v. Reeves, 61 Cal.2d 268, 273 [ 38 Cal.Rptr. 1 , 391 P.2d 393 ]; People v. Miller, 248 Cal.App.2d 731, 736-740 [ 56 Cal.Rptr. 865 ]; cf. Gouled v. United States, 255 U.S. 298, 304-306 [ 65 L.Ed. 647, 650-651 , 41 S.Ct. 261 ]) the seizure of whatever is seen or found is the immediate product of the ruse, Nothing of the kind can be said in the case at bar, at least as a matter of law on a motion to set aside the infor | 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. Dueñas
green
1 sentence2020(Dueñas, supra, 30 Cal.App.5th at p. 1164 .) Relying on Dueñas, Alvarado contends that the court here did not conduct a constitutionally adequate hearing into his ability to pay. | 1 | 2020–2020 |
Sinaiko v. Superior Court
green
1 sentence2008(Sinaiko v. Superior Court, supra, 122 Cal.App.4th at p. 1142 ; Glendale Memorial Hospital & Health Center v. State Dept. of Mental Health (2001) 91 Cal.App.4th 129, 140 [ 110 Cal.Rptr.2d 101 ].) *716 V Board’s Jurisdiction on Remand MHC claims the Board lacks authority to apply judicial doctrines to determine the nature of the tenancies or decide whether tenants relied on oral representations about the leases. | 1 | 2008–2008 |
Wong v. Regents of University of California
green
1 sentence1977Only those applicants who show promise of success and fitness will be admitted . .. and only those who continue to demonstrate a satisfactory level of scholastic competence and fitness shall be eligible to continue in such curricula.” (Italics added.) This regulation was effective on July 26, 1974; we have been unable to discover the nature, if any, of the regulation which preceded it, but note that such general descriptions of an applicable standard have been found constitutionally adequate. ( Wong, supra, 15 Cal.App.3d 823, at p. 832 .) As we have indicated, petitioner seeks to demonstrate t | 1 | 1977–1977 |
In Re Williams
green
1 sentence1970(See People v. Reeves (1966) 64 Cal.2d 766, 772-775 [ 51 Cal. Rptr. 691 , 415 P.2d 35 ]; People v. Robillard (1960) 55 Cal.2d 88, 96-98 [ 10 Cal. Rptr. 167 , 358 P.2d 295 , 83 A.L.R.2d 1086 ]; People v. Glover (1967) 257 Cal. App.2d 502, 507-509 [ 65 Cal. Rptr. 219 ].) When, however, the knowledge necessary to an informed tactical or strategic decision is absent because of counsel's ineptitude or lack of industry, no such ground of justification is possible. ( In re Williams, supra, 1 Cal.3d 168, 177 .) [8] As we have indicated above (see text accompanying fn. 6, ante ), the matter here sought | 1 | 1970–1970 |
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.