again defendant (California) · Go Syfert
← California issues

again defendant in California

10 California opinions name it 3 courts 1947–2024 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)

CaseFollowedCited
The People v. Super. Ct.green
calctapp · 2013 · cited in 2 California opinions naming this issue, 2016–2016
2 sentences

2016This court has previously rejected the contention that section 1170.126 creates a presumption in favor of resentencing. ( Esparza, supra, 242 Cal.App.4th 726, 793 ; accord, Kaulick, supra, 215 Cal.App.4th 1279, 1301-1302 .) Again defendant offers no compelling reason to depart from that holding.

2016This court has previously rejected the contention that section 1170.126 creates a presumption in favor of resentencing. ( Esparza, supra, 242 Cal.App.4th 726, 793 ; accord, Kaulick, supra, 215 Cal.App.4th 1279, 1301-1302 .) Again defendant offers no compelling reason to depart from that holding.

22
Esberg v. Union Oil Companyred
cal · 2002 · cited in 1 California opinions naming this issue, 2015–2015
1 sentence

2015(Prather, supra, 50 28 Cal.4th at p. 262 (conc. opn. of Moreno, J.).) Justice Moreno observed, “Should the Board on remand again deny parole, and the court again rule that the parole denial is unjustified, then a more drastic intervention, such as an outright order that the Board grant parole, may well be warranted.

11
United States v. Richard Joseph Beedle A/K/A Richard Bedlegreen
ca3 · 1972 · cited in 1 California opinions naming this issue, 1991–1991
1 sentence

1991However, we can hardly charge counsel with incompetence for failing to make an argument which we rejected as wrong (see People v. Guerra (1984) 37 Cal.3d 385 [ 208 Cal. Rptr. 162 , 690 P.2d 635 ]), and even if counsel should have made the argument, there is no possibility *1253 of relief, since on retrial, Guerra would require the court to again rule that the witness could not testify. [15] (24a) Finally, defendant argues that he received ineffective assistance of counsel because counsel failed to object to the use of the alias "Panama Red" on the information and verdict forms. (25) It is gene

11
People v. Hawleygreen
calctapp · 1930 · cited in 1 California opinions naming this issue, 1991–1991
2 sentences

1991However, we can hardly charge counsel with incompetence for failing to make an argument which we rejected as wrong (see People v. Guerra (1984) 37 Cal.3d 385 [ 208 Cal. Rptr. 162 , 690 P.2d 635 ]), and even if counsel should have made the argument, there is no possibility *1253 of relief, since on retrial, Guerra would require the court to again rule that the witness could not testify. [15] (24a) Finally, defendant argues that he received ineffective assistance of counsel because counsel failed to object to the use of the alias "Panama Red" on the information and verdict forms. (25) It is gene

1991However, we can hardly charge counsel with incompetence for failing to make an argument which we rejected as wrong (see People v. Guerra (1984) 37 Cal.3d 385 [ 208 Cal. Rptr. 162 , 690 P.2d 635 ]), and even if counsel should have made the argument, there is no possibility *1253 of relief, since on retrial, Guerra would require the court to again rule that the witness could not testify. [15] (24a) Finally, defendant argues that he received ineffective assistance of counsel because counsel failed to object to the use of the alias "Panama Red" on the information and verdict forms. (25) It is gene

11
City of San Bernardino v. City of Riversidegreen
cal · 1921 · cited in 1 California opinions naming this issue, 1980–1980
2 sentences

1980Accordingly, the effect of today's opinion is to prevent recognition of all post-1913 prescriptive claims. [4] Six years later, this court again stated the doctrine that water rights could be acquired by adverse user: "Prescriptive rights are not acquired by the taking of surplus or excess water, since no injunction may issue against the taking and the appropriator may take the surplus without giving compensation; however, both overlying owners and appropriators are entitled to the protection of the courts against any substantial infringement of their rights in water which they reasonably and

1980Accordingly, the effect of today's opinion is to prevent recognition of all post-1913 prescriptive claims. [4] Six years later, this court again stated the doctrine that water rights could be acquired by adverse user: "Prescriptive rights are not acquired by the taking of surplus or excess water, since no injunction may issue against the taking and the appropriator may take the surplus without giving compensation; however, both overlying owners and appropriators are entitled to the protection of the courts against any substantial infringement of their rights in water which they reasonably and

11
City of Los Angeles v. City of Glendalegreen
cal · 1943 · cited in 1 California opinions naming this issue, 1980–1980
2 sentences

1980St.Rep. 35, 64 L.R.A. 236 ]; 25 Cal.Jur. 1178, 1157-1158; 1 Cal.Jur. 585; 26 Cal.Jur. 278-279; cf., Wutchumna Water Co. v. Ragle, 148 Cal. 759, 764-765 [ 84 P. 162 ].) To perfect a claim based upon prescription there must, of course, be conduct which constitutes an actual invasion of the former owner's rights so as to entitle him to bring an action. ( City of Los Angeles v. City of Glendale, 23 Cal.2d 68, 79 [ 142 P.2d 289 ].) Appropriative and prescriptive rights to ground water, as well as the rights of an overlying owner, are subject to loss by adverse user.

1980St.Rep. 35, 64 L.R.A. 236 ]; 25 Cal.Jur. 1178, 1157-1158; 1 Cal.Jur. 585; 26 Cal.Jur. 278-279; cf., Wutchumna Water Co. v. Ragle, 148 Cal. 759, 764-765 [ 84 P. 162 ].) To perfect a claim based upon prescription there must, of course, be conduct which constitutes an actual invasion of the former owner's rights so as to entitle him to bring an action. ( City of Los Angeles v. City of Glendale, 23 Cal.2d 68, 79 [ 142 P.2d 289 ].) Appropriative and prescriptive rights to ground water, as well as the rights of an overlying owner, are subject to loss by adverse user.

11
Peabody v. City of Vallejogreen
cal · 1935 · cited in 1 California opinions naming this issue, 1980–1980
2 sentences

1980Accordingly, the effect of today's opinion is to prevent recognition of all post-1913 prescriptive claims. [4] Six years later, this court again stated the doctrine that water rights could be acquired by adverse user: "Prescriptive rights are not acquired by the taking of surplus or excess water, since no injunction may issue against the taking and the appropriator may take the surplus without giving compensation; however, both overlying owners and appropriators are entitled to the protection of the courts against any substantial infringement of their rights in water which they reasonably and

1980Accordingly, the effect of today's opinion is to prevent recognition of all post-1913 prescriptive claims. [4] Six years later, this court again stated the doctrine that water rights could be acquired by adverse user: "Prescriptive rights are not acquired by the taking of surplus or excess water, since no injunction may issue against the taking and the appropriator may take the surplus without giving compensation; however, both overlying owners and appropriators are entitled to the protection of the courts against any substantial infringement of their rights in water which they reasonably and

11
Katz v. Walkinshawgreen
cal · 1903 · cited in 1 California opinions naming this issue, 1980–1980
2 sentences

1980Accordingly, the effect of today's opinion is to prevent recognition of all post-1913 prescriptive claims. [4] Six years later, this court again stated the doctrine that water rights could be acquired by adverse user: "Prescriptive rights are not acquired by the taking of surplus or excess water, since no injunction may issue against the taking and the appropriator may take the surplus without giving compensation; however, both overlying owners and appropriators are entitled to the protection of the courts against any substantial infringement of their rights in water which they reasonably and

1980Accordingly, the effect of today's opinion is to prevent recognition of all post-1913 prescriptive claims. [4] Six years later, this court again stated the doctrine that water rights could be acquired by adverse user: "Prescriptive rights are not acquired by the taking of surplus or excess water, since no injunction may issue against the taking and the appropriator may take the surplus without giving compensation; however, both overlying owners and appropriators are entitled to the protection of the courts against any substantial infringement of their rights in water which they reasonably and

11
Wutchumna v. Water Co. v. Raglegreen
cal · 1906 · cited in 1 California opinions naming this issue, 1980–1980
2 sentences

1980St.Rep. 35, 64 L.R.A. 236 ]; 25 Cal.Jur. 1178, 1157-1158; 1 Cal.Jur. 585; 26 Cal.Jur. 278-279; cf., Wutchumna Water Co. v. Ragle, 148 Cal. 759, 764-765 [ 84 P. 162 ].) To perfect a claim based upon prescription there must, of course, be conduct which constitutes an actual invasion of the former owner's rights so as to entitle him to bring an action. ( City of Los Angeles v. City of Glendale, 23 Cal.2d 68, 79 [ 142 P.2d 289 ].) Appropriative and prescriptive rights to ground water, as well as the rights of an overlying owner, are subject to loss by adverse user.

1980St.Rep. 35, 64 L.R.A. 236 ]; 25 Cal.Jur. 1178, 1157-1158; 1 Cal.Jur. 585; 26 Cal.Jur. 278-279; cf., Wutchumna Water Co. v. Ragle, 148 Cal. 759, 764-765 [ 84 P. 162 ].) To perfect a claim based upon prescription there must, of course, be conduct which constitutes an actual invasion of the former owner's rights so as to entitle him to bring an action. ( City of Los Angeles v. City of Glendale, 23 Cal.2d 68, 79 [ 142 P.2d 289 ].) Appropriative and prescriptive rights to ground water, as well as the rights of an overlying owner, are subject to loss by adverse user.

11

Distinguished, questioned or overruled (1)

CaseNegativeCited
United States v. Paydengreen
nysd · 1985 · cited in 1 California opinions naming this issue, 1991–1991
1 sentence

1991However, we can hardly charge counsel with incompetence for failing to make an argument which we rejected as wrong (see People v. Guerra (1984) 37 Cal.3d 385 [ 208 Cal. Rptr. 162 , 690 P.2d 635 ]), and even if counsel should have made the argument, there is no possibility *1253 of relief, since on retrial, Guerra would require the court to again rule that the witness could not testify. [15] (24a) Finally, defendant argues that he received ineffective assistance of counsel because counsel failed to object to the use of the alias "Panama Red" on the information and verdict forms. (25) It is gene

11

Also cited on this issue (7)

CaseCitedYears
People v. Esparza green
calctapp · 2015
2 sentences

2016This court has previously rejected the contention that section 1170.126 creates a presumption in favor of resentencing. ( Esparza, supra, 242 Cal.App.4th 726, 793 ; accord, Kaulick, supra, 215 Cal.App.4th 1279, 1301-1302 .) Again defendant offers no compelling reason to depart from that holding.

2016This court has previously rejected the contention that section 1170.126 creates a presumption in favor of resentencing. ( Esparza, supra, 242 Cal.App.4th 726, 793 ; accord, Kaulick, supra, 215 Cal.App.4th 1279, 1301-1302 .) Again defendant offers no compelling reason to depart from that holding.

22016–2016
People v. DeHoyos green
cal · 2013
1 sentence

2024(See People v. DeHoyos (2013) 57 Cal.4th 79, 147 .) Again defendant relies on speculative assumptions which we have rejected as he reviews some of the evidence against him, in an effort to suggest the evidence against him was weak.

12024–2024
People v. Pettingill green
cal · 1978
1 sentence

2021The officer readvised defendant of his Miranda rights and ‘asked him again if he wished to make a statement . . . .’ Again defendant replied that he did not want to talk to the police, and he was transferred to the county jail.” (Pettingill, supra, 21 Cal.3d at p. 235 .) 21 Three days after his arrest, a detective from the Santa Barbara Police Department initiated a third interrogation of the defendant, despite the fact there had been no indication in the interim that the defendant had changed his mind and wanted to talk to police and the detective knew the defendant had twice invoked his righ

12021–2021
People v. Howie green
calctapp · 1995
1 sentence

2016The prosecution once again tried to use the 1973 offense to enhance punishment for an offense occurring in 1993. ( Id. at pp. 734-735, 48 Cal.Rptr.2d 505 .) The court held the prosecution could not continue to relitigate the validity of the 1973 ruling that was never appealed: "[The 1973 ruling] determined a matter of substantial right on an issue of law, and the People were a party to that proceeding.

12016–2016
Jones v. H. F. Ahmanson & Co. green
cal · 1969
2 sentences

1997Any use to which they put the corporation or their power to control the corporation must benefit all shareholders proportionately and must not conflict with the proper conduct of the corporation’s business.” (Jones, supra, 1 Cal.3d at p. 108 .) We adopted “the comprehensive rule of good faith and inherent fairness to the minority in any transaction where control of the corporation is material” (id. at p. 112), and declared broadly that “[t]he rule applies alike to officers, directors, and controlling shareholders in the exercise of powers that are theirs by virtue of their position and to tran

1997Any use to which they put the corporation or their power to control the corporation must benefit all shareholders proportionately and must not conflict with the proper conduct of the corporation's business." ( Jones, supra, 1 Cal.3d at p. 108 .) We adopted "the comprehensive rule of good faith and inherent fairness to the minority in any transaction where control of the corporation is material" ( id. at p. 112), and declared broadly that "[t]he rule applies alike to officers, directors, and controlling shareholders in the exercise of powers that are theirs by virtue of their position and to tr

11997–1997
People v. Guerra green
cal · 1984
2 sentences

1991However, we can hardly charge counsel with incompetence for failing to make an argument which we rejected as wrong (see People v. Guerra (1984) 37 Cal.3d 385 [ 208 Cal. Rptr. 162 , 690 P.2d 635 ]), and even if counsel should have made the argument, there is no possibility *1253 of relief, since on retrial, Guerra would require the court to again rule that the witness could not testify. [15] (24a) Finally, defendant argues that he received ineffective assistance of counsel because counsel failed to object to the use of the alias "Panama Red" on the information and verdict forms. (25) It is gene

1991However, we can hardly charge counsel with incompetence for failing to make an argument which we rejected as wrong (see People v. Guerra (1984) 37 Cal.3d 385 [ 208 Cal. Rptr. 162 , 690 P.2d 635 ]), and even if counsel should have made the argument, there is no possibility *1253 of relief, since on retrial, Guerra would require the court to again rule that the witness could not testify. [15] (24a) Finally, defendant argues that he received ineffective assistance of counsel because counsel failed to object to the use of the alias "Panama Red" on the information and verdict forms. (25) It is gene

11991–1991
Follett v. Town of McCormick green
scotus · 1944
2 sentences

1947Income taxes, ad valorem taxes, even occupational taxes are presumably valid, save only a license tax on sales of religious books.” (P. 129.) In Follett v. McCormick, 321 U.S. 573 [ 64 S.Ct. 717 , 88 L.Ed. 938 , 152 A.L.R. 317 ], the same type of ordinance considered in the Murdock case was involved and the court again stated the exception applicable in the case at bar as follows: “This does not mean that religious undertakings must be subsidized.

1947Income taxes, ad valorem taxes, even occupational taxes are presumably valid, save only a license tax on sales of religious books.” (P. 129.) In Follett v. McCormick, 321 U.S. 573 [ 64 S.Ct. 717 , 88 L.Ed. 938 , 152 A.L.R. 317 ], the same type of ordinance considered in the Murdock case was involved and the court again stated the exception applicable in the case at bar as follows: “This does not mean that religious undertakings must be subsidized.

11947–1947

Statutes the citing opinions construe

CA § Cal. Evidence Code § 452 (3)

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.

Where else courts name it

CA 10 (1947–2024) IL 7 (1897–1979) MS 6 (1952–1992) OK 6 (1929–2017) CO 5 (1964–2015) PA 5 (1941–1995) WI 5 (1928–1999) NY 4 (1936–2018) LA 4 (1974–2013) NM 3 (1948–2025) IN 3 (1971–1996) FL 3 (1959–2010) TX 3 (1977–1994) OR 2 (1930–1993) MO 2 (1905–1963) KS 2 (1981–1981)

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