10 California opinions name it 3 courts 2018–2026 8 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 |
|---|---|---|
United States v. Salernogreen2 sentences2024We agreed that “[w]hile due process does not categorically prohibit the government from ordering pretrial detention, it remains true that ‘[i]n our society liberty is the norm, and detention prior to trial or without trial is the carefully limited exception.’ ” (Id. at p. 155, quoting Salerno, supra, 481 U.S. at p. 755 .) We added: “Marking the boundary between the general rule and the limited exception requires a careful balancing of the government’s interest in preventing crime against the individual’s fundamental right to pretrial liberty. [Citation.] This territory has not yet been fully m 2024We agreed that “[w]hile due process does not categorically prohibit the government from ordering pretrial detention, it remains true that ‘[i]n our society liberty is the norm, and detention prior to trial or without trial is the carefully limited exception.’ ” (Id. at p. 155, quoting Salerno, supra, 481 U.S. at p. 755 .) We added: “Marking the boundary between the general rule and the limited exception requires a careful balancing of the government’s interest in preventing crime against the individual’s fundamental right to pretrial liberty. [Citation.] This territory has not yet been fully m | 3 | 7 |
Foucha v. Louisianagreen2 sentences2018As the Court explained in Salerno, [ supra, ] 481 U.S. at 755 [ 107 S.Ct. 2095 ], 'liberty is the norm, and detention prior to trial or without trial is the carefully limited exception.' See also Zadvydas v. Davis [ (2001) ] 533 U.S. 678 , 690 [ 121 S.Ct. 2491 , 150 L.Ed.2d 653 ] ('Freedom from imprisonment-from government custody, detention, or other forms of physical restraint-lies at the heart of the liberty that [the Due Process] Clause protects.'); Foucha , 504 U.S. at 90 [ 112 S.Ct. 1780 ] (Kennedy, J. dissenting.) ('As incarceration of persons is the most common and one of the most fear 2018As the Court explained in Salerno, [ supra, ] 481 U.S. at 755 [ 107 S.Ct. 2095 ], 'liberty is the norm, and detention prior to trial or without trial is the carefully limited exception.' See also Zadvydas v. Davis [ (2001) ] 533 U.S. 678 , 690 [ 121 S.Ct. 2491 , 150 L.Ed.2d 653 ] ('Freedom from imprisonment-from government custody, detention, or other forms of physical restraint-lies at the heart of the liberty that [the Due Process] Clause protects.'); Foucha , 504 U.S. at 90 [ 112 S.Ct. 1780 ] (Kennedy, J. dissenting.) ('As incarceration of persons is the most common and one of the most fear | 2 | 2 |
In re Humphreygreen2 sentences2026Our holdings with respect to fixing bail may be summarized as follows: First, we start with the premise, as we did in Humphrey, that pretrial “ ‘liberty is the norm, and detention prior to trial or without trial is the carefully limited exception.’ ” (Humphrey, supra, 11 Cal.5th at p. 155 .) As we have held, a court may order the pretrial detention of a noncapital defendant only in the circumstances specified in subdivisions (b) and (c) of section 12. 2023“While due process does not categorically prohibit the government from ordering pretrial detention, it remains true that ‘[i]n our society liberty is the norm, and detention prior to trial . . . is the carefully limited exception.’” (Humphrey, supra, 11 Cal.5th at p. 155 .) To order the pretrial detention of a person charged with a violent felony, section 12(b) and Humphrey require findings, by clear and convincing evidence, that the person’s release would result in a substantial likelihood of great bodily harm to others and that less restrictive conditions are insufficient to vindicate the st | 1 | 4 |
Zadvydas v. Davisgreen2 sentences2018As the Court explained in Salerno, [ supra, ] 481 U.S. at 755 [ 107 S.Ct. 2095 ], 'liberty is the norm, and detention prior to trial or without trial is the carefully limited exception.' See also Zadvydas v. Davis [ (2001) ] 533 U.S. 678 , 690 [ 121 S.Ct. 2491 , 150 L.Ed.2d 653 ] ('Freedom from imprisonment-from government custody, detention, or other forms of physical restraint-lies at the heart of the liberty that [the Due Process] Clause protects.'); Foucha , 504 U.S. at 90 [ 112 S.Ct. 1780 ] (Kennedy, J. dissenting.) ('As incarceration of persons is the most common and one of the most fear 2018As the Court explained in Salerno, [ supra, ] 481 U.S. at 755 [ 107 S.Ct. 2095 ], 'liberty is the norm, and detention prior to trial or without trial is the carefully limited exception.' See also Zadvydas v. Davis [ (2001) ] 533 U.S. 678 , 690 [ 121 S.Ct. 2491 , 150 L.Ed.2d 653 ] ('Freedom from imprisonment-from government custody, detention, or other forms of physical restraint-lies at the heart of the liberty that [the Due Process] Clause protects.'); Foucha , 504 U.S. at 90 [ 112 S.Ct. 1780 ] (Kennedy, J. dissenting.) ('As incarceration of persons is the most common and one of the most fear | 1 | 2 |
Angel Lopez-Valenzuela v. County of Maricopagreen2 sentences2018As the Court explained in Salerno, [ supra, ] 481 U.S. at 755 [ 107 S.Ct. 2095 ], 'liberty is the norm, and detention prior to trial or without trial is the carefully limited exception.' See also Zadvydas v. Davis [ (2001) ] 533 U.S. 678 , 690 [ 121 S.Ct. 2491 , 150 L.Ed.2d 653 ] ('Freedom from imprisonment-from government custody, detention, or other forms of physical restraint-lies at the heart of the liberty that [the Due Process] Clause protects.'); Foucha , 504 U.S. at 90 [ 112 S.Ct. 1780 ] (Kennedy, J. dissenting.) ('As incarceration of persons is the most common and one of the most fear 2018As the Court explained in Salerno, [ supra, ] 481 U.S. at 755 [ 107 S.Ct. 2095 ], 'liberty is the norm, and detention prior to trial or without trial is the carefully limited exception.' See also Zadvydas v. Davis [ (2001) ] 533 U.S. 678 , 690 [ 121 S.Ct. 2491 , 150 L.Ed.2d 653 ] ('Freedom from imprisonment-from government custody, detention, or other forms of physical restraint-lies at the heart of the liberty that [the Due Process] Clause protects.'); Foucha , 504 U.S. at 90 [ 112 S.Ct. 1780 ] (Kennedy, J. dissenting.) ('As incarceration of persons is the most common and one of the most fear | 1 | 2 |
Mathews v. Eldridgegreen1 sentence2021(See In re White, supra, 9 Cal.5th at pp. 470–471.) 22 In re HUMPHREY Opinion of the Court by Cuéllar, J. law under review there authorized pretrial detention “only on individuals who have been arrested for a specific category of extremely serious offenses.” (Ibid.; accord, Com. v. Vieira (Mass. 2019) 133 N.E.3d 296 , 301 [“The practice of pretrial detention on the basis of dangerousness has been upheld as constitutional in part because the Legislature ‘carefully limit[ed] the circumstances under which detention may be sought to the most serious of crimes’ ”].)8 A court’s procedures for enteri | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in California. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Turner v. Rogers
green
2 sentences2018Turner v. Rogers (2011) 564 U.S. 431 , 131 S.Ct. 2507 , 180 L.Ed.2d 452 ( Turner ) is instructive in this regard. 2018Turner v. Rogers (2011) 564 U.S. 431 , 131 S.Ct. 2507 , 180 L.Ed.2d 452 ( Turner ) is instructive in this regard. | 2 | 2018–2018 |
In RE McSHERRY
green
1 sentence2022A. Legal Principles “Habeas corpus is an appropriate vehicle by which to raise questions concerning the legality of bail grants or deprivations.” (In re McSherry (2003) 112 Cal.App.4th 856, 859-860 .) Our Supreme Court has recognized that “those incarcerated pending trial— who have not yet been convicted of a charged crime—unquestionably suffer a ‘direct “grievous loss” ’of freedom in addition to other potential injuries. [Citation.]” (In re Humphrey (2021) 11 Cal.5th 135, 142 (Humphrey).) Therefore, “ ‘[i]n our society liberty is the norm, and detention prior to trial or without trial is the | 1 | 2022–2022 |
In re Humphrey
green
1 sentence2021(See Humphrey, supra, 19 Cal.App.5th at p. 1026 .) Pretrial detention on victim and public safety grounds, subject to specific and reliable constitutional constraints, is a key element of our criminal justice system. | 1 | 2021–2021 |
Reno v. Flores
green
1 sentence2018As the Court explained in Salerno, [ supra, ] 481 U.S. at 755 [ 107 S.Ct. 2095 ], 'liberty is the norm, and detention prior to trial or without trial is the carefully limited exception.' See also Zadvydas v. Davis [ (2001) ] 533 U.S. 678 , 690 [ 121 S.Ct. 2491 , 150 L.Ed.2d 653 ] ('Freedom from imprisonment-from government custody, detention, or other forms of physical restraint-lies at the heart of the liberty that [the Due Process] Clause protects.'); Foucha , 504 U.S. at 90 [ 112 S.Ct. 1780 ] (Kennedy, J. dissenting.) ('As incarceration of persons is the most common and one of the most fear | 1 | 2018–2018 |
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.