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.
10 California opinions name it 2 courts 1968–2025 3 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. Medinagreen2 sentences2020(See People v. Medina (2019) 33 Cal.App.5th 146, 156 (Medina).) The evidence at trial showed an indiscriminate shooting into a crowded room, which under Stone’s analysis could make Thompkins guilty of multiple attempted murders if it were shown that he harbored an intent to kill indiscriminately. 2020(See People v. Medina (2019) 33 Cal.App.5th 146, 156 (Medina).) The evidence at trial showed an indiscriminate shooting into a crowded room, which under Stone’s analysis could make Thompkins guilty of multiple attempted murders if it were shown that he harbored an intent to kill indiscriminately. | 2 | 2 |
Stone v. Superior Courtgreen2 sentences2019In addition to seriously infringing on the defendant's double jeopardy interest in avoiding retrial for offenses on which he has been factually acquitted, such a rule would make his substantive rights turn on the formality of whether he was charged in separate counts with the greater offense and the lesser included offense, or was charged in a single count with only the greater offense." ( Stone , at pp. 517-518, 183 Cal.Rptr. 647 , 646 P.2d 809 .) The Stone rule "protects a defendant from retrial when the jury agrees that the greater offense was not proven but cannot agree on a lesser include 2019In addition to seriously infringing on the defendant's double jeopardy interest in avoiding retrial for offenses on which he has been factually acquitted, such a rule would make his substantive rights turn on the formality of whether he was charged in separate counts with the greater offense and the lesser included offense, or was charged in a single count with only the greater offense." ( Stone , at pp. 517-518, 183 Cal.Rptr. 647 , 646 P.2d 809 .) The Stone rule "protects a defendant from retrial when the jury agrees that the greater offense was not proven but cannot agree on a lesser include | 1 | 3 |
Aldrich v. San Fernando Valley Lumber Co.green1 sentence2025(Rappleyea v. Campbell (1994) 8 Cal.4th 975, 980 ; Aldrich v. San Fernando Valley Lumber Co. (1985) 170 Cal.App.3d 725, 735, fn. 3 [“[t]he six-month time limit for granting relief under section 473 is jurisdictional”]; Kokubu v. Sudo (2022) 76 Cal.App.5th 1074 , 1082 [trial court’s order will be affirmed if supported by any legal theory].) 18 DISPOSITION The order denying Stone’s motion to vacate the renewal of judgment is affirmed. | 1 | 1 |
People v. Andersongreen2 sentences2019Without the rule, a general declaration of mistrial would disguise the fact that the jury agreed the defendant was not guilty of the greater offense, making the defendant subject to retrial on both the greater and lesser offenses." ( Anderson , supra , 47 Cal.4th at p. 114 , 97 Cal.Rptr.3d 77 , 211 P.3d 584 .) We further clarified in People v. Kurtzman (1988) 46 Cal.3d 322 , 250 Cal.Rptr. 244 , 758 P.2d 572 ( Kurtzman ) that, although a jury may consider the charges in any order, "the jury must acquit of the greater offense before returning a verdict on the lesser included offense ...." ( Id . 2019Without the rule, a general declaration of mistrial would disguise the fact that the jury agreed the defendant was not guilty of the greater offense, making the defendant subject to retrial on both the greater and lesser offenses." ( Anderson , supra , 47 Cal.4th at p. 114 , 97 Cal.Rptr.3d 77 , 211 P.3d 584 .) We further clarified in People v. Kurtzman (1988) 46 Cal.3d 322 , 250 Cal.Rptr. 244 , 758 P.2d 572 ( Kurtzman ) that, although a jury may consider the charges in any order, "the jury must acquit of the greater offense before returning a verdict on the lesser included offense ...." ( Id . | 1 | 1 |
| MacPherson v. MacPhersongreen | 1 | 1 |
| Travis v. Travisgreen | 1 | 1 |
| MacDonald v. Superior Courtgreen | 1 | 1 |
| Bank of America National Trust & Savings Ass'n v. Lamb Finance Co.green | 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. Stone
green
2 sentences2020(Stone, supra, 46 Cal.4th at p. 140 .) He could at least be found guilty of attempting to murder the five victims he wounded when 10 shots were fired. 2020(Stone, supra, 46 Cal.4th at p. 140 .) He could at least be found guilty of attempting to murder the five victims he wounded when 10 shots were fired. | 2 | 2020–2020 |
Kokubu v. Sudo
green
1 sentence2025(Rappleyea v. Campbell (1994) 8 Cal.4th 975, 980 ; Aldrich v. San Fernando Valley Lumber Co. (1985) 170 Cal.App.3d 725, 735, fn. 3 [“[t]he six-month time limit for granting relief under section 473 is jurisdictional”]; Kokubu v. Sudo (2022) 76 Cal.App.5th 1074 , 1082 [trial court’s order will be affirmed if supported by any legal theory].) 18 DISPOSITION The order denying Stone’s motion to vacate the renewal of judgment is affirmed. | 1 | 2025–2025 |
Rappleyea v. Campbell
green
1 sentence2025(Rappleyea v. Campbell (1994) 8 Cal.4th 975, 980 ; Aldrich v. San Fernando Valley Lumber Co. (1985) 170 Cal.App.3d 725, 735, fn. 3 [“[t]he six-month time limit for granting relief under section 473 is jurisdictional”]; Kokubu v. Sudo (2022) 76 Cal.App.5th 1074 , 1082 [trial court’s order will be affirmed if supported by any legal theory].) 18 DISPOSITION The order denying Stone’s motion to vacate the renewal of judgment is affirmed. | 1 | 2025–2025 |
People v. Delgadillo
green
2 sentences2023The only theory under which the jury could have convicted him is a theory that is still a valid theory, and for those reasons the petition is denied.” On August 21, 2023, defendant filed a notice of appeal from the denial of his section 1172.6 petition. 521 (willful, deliberate, and premeditated theory of first degree murder); 522 (effect of provocation to reduce murder from first to second); 570 (heat of passion); 571 (imperfect self-defense); 505 (justifiable homicide—perfect self-defense); 3471 (right of self-defense, mutual combat or initial aggressor); 3472 (right to self-defense may not 2023The only theory under which the jury could have convicted him is a theory that is still a valid theory, and for those reasons the petition is denied.” On August 21, 2023, defendant filed a notice of appeal from the denial of his section 1172.6 petition. 521 (willful, deliberate, and premeditated theory of first degree murder); 522 (effect of provocation to reduce murder from first to second); 570 (heat of passion); 571 (imperfect self-defense); 505 (justifiable homicide—perfect self-defense); 3471 (right of self-defense, mutual combat or initial aggressor); 3472 (right to self-defense may not | 1 | 2023–2023 |
People v. Wende
green
2 sentences2023The only theory under which the jury could have convicted him is a theory that is still a valid theory, and for those reasons the petition is denied.” On August 21, 2023, defendant filed a notice of appeal from the denial of his section 1172.6 petition. 521 (willful, deliberate, and premeditated theory of first degree murder); 522 (effect of provocation to reduce murder from first to second); 570 (heat of passion); 571 (imperfect self-defense); 505 (justifiable homicide—perfect self-defense); 3471 (right of self-defense, mutual combat or initial aggressor); 3472 (right to self-defense may not 2023The only theory under which the jury could have convicted him is a theory that is still a valid theory, and for those reasons the petition is denied.” On August 21, 2023, defendant filed a notice of appeal from the denial of his section 1172.6 petition. 521 (willful, deliberate, and premeditated theory of first degree murder); 522 (effect of provocation to reduce murder from first to second); 570 (heat of passion); 571 (imperfect self-defense); 505 (justifiable homicide—perfect self-defense); 3471 (right of self-defense, mutual combat or initial aggressor); 3472 (right to self-defense may not | 1 | 2023–2023 |
Blueford v. Arkansas
green
2 sentences2019The question here is whether the Stone rule has been abrogated by the United States Supreme Court's decision in Blueford v. Arkansas (2012) 566 U.S. 599 , 132 S.Ct. 2044 , 182 L.Ed.2d 937 ( Blueford ), which concluded that federal double jeopardy principles do not require a court to accept a partial verdict. 2019The question here is whether the Stone rule has been abrogated by the United States Supreme Court's decision in Blueford v. Arkansas (2012) 566 U.S. 599 , 132 S.Ct. 2044 , 182 L.Ed.2d 937 ( Blueford ), which concluded that federal double jeopardy principles do not require a court to accept a partial verdict. | 1 | 2019–2019 |
Traylor, Peter Anthony
green
2 sentences2019As the most recent of the pre- Blueford cases summarizes, "Several other jurisdictions have addressed this issue, and the majority has held that if a single charge includes multiple degrees of offenses, the trial court may not conduct a partial verdict inquiry as to the offenses included within the charge. [Citing State v. Bell (Iowa 1982) 322 N.W.2d 93 , 95, State v. McKay (1975) 217 Kan. 11 , 535 P.2d 945 , 947, People v. Hall (1975) 25 Ill.App.3d 992 , 324 N.E.2d 50 , 52-53, Commonwealth v. Roth (2002) 437 Mass. 777 , 776 N.E.2d 437 , 450, People v. Hickey (1981) 103 Mich.App. 350 , 303 N.W 2019As the most recent of the pre- Blueford cases summarizes, "Several other jurisdictions have addressed this issue, and the majority has held that if a single charge includes multiple degrees of offenses, the trial court may not conduct a partial verdict inquiry as to the offenses included within the charge. [Citing State v. Bell (Iowa 1982) 322 N.W.2d 93 , 95, State v. McKay (1975) 217 Kan. 11 , 535 P.2d 945 , 947, People v. Hall (1975) 25 Ill.App.3d 992 , 324 N.E.2d 50 , 52-53, Commonwealth v. Roth (2002) 437 Mass. 777 , 776 N.E.2d 437 , 450, People v. Hickey (1981) 103 Mich.App. 350 , 303 N.W | 1 | 2019–2019 |
State v. McKay
green
2 sentences2019As the most recent of the pre- Blueford cases summarizes, "Several other jurisdictions have addressed this issue, and the majority has held that if a single charge includes multiple degrees of offenses, the trial court may not conduct a partial verdict inquiry as to the offenses included within the charge. [Citing State v. Bell (Iowa 1982) 322 N.W.2d 93 , 95, State v. McKay (1975) 217 Kan. 11 , 535 P.2d 945 , 947, People v. Hall (1975) 25 Ill.App.3d 992 , 324 N.E.2d 50 , 52-53, Commonwealth v. Roth (2002) 437 Mass. 777 , 776 N.E.2d 437 , 450, People v. Hickey (1981) 103 Mich.App. 350 , 303 N.W 2019As the most recent of the pre- Blueford cases summarizes, "Several other jurisdictions have addressed this issue, and the majority has held that if a single charge includes multiple degrees of offenses, the trial court may not conduct a partial verdict inquiry as to the offenses included within the charge. [Citing State v. Bell (Iowa 1982) 322 N.W.2d 93 , 95, State v. McKay (1975) 217 Kan. 11 , 535 P.2d 945 , 947, People v. Hall (1975) 25 Ill.App.3d 992 , 324 N.E.2d 50 , 52-53, Commonwealth v. Roth (2002) 437 Mass. 777 , 776 N.E.2d 437 , 450, People v. Hickey (1981) 103 Mich.App. 350 , 303 N.W | 1 | 2019–2019 |
State v. Fennell
green
2 sentences2019As the most recent of the pre- Blueford cases summarizes, "Several other jurisdictions have addressed this issue, and the majority has held that if a single charge includes multiple degrees of offenses, the trial court may not conduct a partial verdict inquiry as to the offenses included within the charge. [Citing State v. Bell (Iowa 1982) 322 N.W.2d 93 , 95, State v. McKay (1975) 217 Kan. 11 , 535 P.2d 945 , 947, People v. Hall (1975) 25 Ill.App.3d 992 , 324 N.E.2d 50 , 52-53, Commonwealth v. Roth (2002) 437 Mass. 777 , 776 N.E.2d 437 , 450, People v. Hickey (1981) 103 Mich.App. 350 , 303 N.W 2019As the most recent of the pre- Blueford cases summarizes, "Several other jurisdictions have addressed this issue, and the majority has held that if a single charge includes multiple degrees of offenses, the trial court may not conduct a partial verdict inquiry as to the offenses included within the charge. [Citing State v. Bell (Iowa 1982) 322 N.W.2d 93 , 95, State v. McKay (1975) 217 Kan. 11 , 535 P.2d 945 , 947, People v. Hall (1975) 25 Ill.App.3d 992 , 324 N.E.2d 50 , 52-53, Commonwealth v. Roth (2002) 437 Mass. 777 , 776 N.E.2d 437 , 450, People v. Hickey (1981) 103 Mich.App. 350 , 303 N.W | 1 | 2019–2019 |
Commonwealth v. Roth
green
2 sentences2019As the most recent of the pre- Blueford cases summarizes, "Several other jurisdictions have addressed this issue, and the majority has held that if a single charge includes multiple degrees of offenses, the trial court may not conduct a partial verdict inquiry as to the offenses included within the charge. [Citing State v. Bell (Iowa 1982) 322 N.W.2d 93 , 95, State v. McKay (1975) 217 Kan. 11 , 535 P.2d 945 , 947, People v. Hall (1975) 25 Ill.App.3d 992 , 324 N.E.2d 50 , 52-53, Commonwealth v. Roth (2002) 437 Mass. 777 , 776 N.E.2d 437 , 450, People v. Hickey (1981) 103 Mich.App. 350 , 303 N.W 2019As the most recent of the pre- Blueford cases summarizes, "Several other jurisdictions have addressed this issue, and the majority has held that if a single charge includes multiple degrees of offenses, the trial court may not conduct a partial verdict inquiry as to the offenses included within the charge. [Citing State v. Bell (Iowa 1982) 322 N.W.2d 93 , 95, State v. McKay (1975) 217 Kan. 11 , 535 P.2d 945 , 947, People v. Hall (1975) 25 Ill.App.3d 992 , 324 N.E.2d 50 , 52-53, Commonwealth v. Roth (2002) 437 Mass. 777 , 776 N.E.2d 437 , 450, People v. Hickey (1981) 103 Mich.App. 350 , 303 N.W | 1 | 2019–2019 |
People v. Fields
green
2 sentences2019(See Stone, at p. 516, 183 Cal.Rptr. 647 , 646 P.2d 809 [referencing "the double jeopardy clause" without differentiation].) We conclude the Stone rule survives as an interpretation of California's double jeopardy clause. "[T]he California Constitution is a document of independent force and effect that may be interpreted in a manner more protective of defendants' rights than that extended by the federal Constitution, as construed by the United States Supreme Court." ( People v. Fields (1996) 13 Cal.4th 289 , 298, 52 Cal.Rptr.2d 282 , 914 P.2d 832 ( Fields ).) The state double jeopardy clause w 2019(See Stone, at p. 516, 183 Cal.Rptr. 647 , 646 P.2d 809 [referencing "the double jeopardy clause" without differentiation].) We conclude the Stone rule survives as an interpretation of California's double jeopardy clause. "[T]he California Constitution is a document of independent force and effect that may be interpreted in a manner more protective of defendants' rights than that extended by the federal Constitution, as construed by the United States Supreme Court." ( People v. Fields (1996) 13 Cal.4th 289 , 298, 52 Cal.Rptr.2d 282 , 914 P.2d 832 ( Fields ).) The state double jeopardy clause w | 1 | 2019–2019 |
People v. Anzalone
green
2 sentences2019The jury must declare in open court if it has unanimously agreed to a verdict and, if the jury agrees on some counts and not others, the court must accept the verdicts upon which the jury agrees. ( § 1160 ; cf. People v. Anzalone (2013) 56 Cal.4th 545 , 555, 155 Cal.Rptr.3d 352 , 298 P.3d 849 [§ 1149 part of "procedural provisions designed to protect the right to a unanimous verdict"].) The Stone rule, allowing verdicts of acquittal for a greater offense when the jury unanimously agrees, is fully consistent with a statutory scheme that generally requires a jury to announce when it agrees and r 2019The jury must declare in open court if it has unanimously agreed to a verdict and, if the jury agrees on some counts and not others, the court must accept the verdicts upon which the jury agrees. ( § 1160 ; cf. People v. Anzalone (2013) 56 Cal.4th 545 , 555, 155 Cal.Rptr.3d 352 , 298 P.3d 849 [§ 1149 part of "procedural provisions designed to protect the right to a unanimous verdict"].) The Stone rule, allowing verdicts of acquittal for a greater offense when the jury unanimously agrees, is fully consistent with a statutory scheme that generally requires a jury to announce when it agrees and r | 1 | 2019–2019 |
People v. Hall
green
2 sentences2019As the most recent of the pre- Blueford cases summarizes, "Several other jurisdictions have addressed this issue, and the majority has held that if a single charge includes multiple degrees of offenses, the trial court may not conduct a partial verdict inquiry as to the offenses included within the charge. [Citing State v. Bell (Iowa 1982) 322 N.W.2d 93 , 95, State v. McKay (1975) 217 Kan. 11 , 535 P.2d 945 , 947, People v. Hall (1975) 25 Ill.App.3d 992 , 324 N.E.2d 50 , 52-53, Commonwealth v. Roth (2002) 437 Mass. 777 , 776 N.E.2d 437 , 450, People v. Hickey (1981) 103 Mich.App. 350 , 303 N.W 2019As the most recent of the pre- Blueford cases summarizes, "Several other jurisdictions have addressed this issue, and the majority has held that if a single charge includes multiple degrees of offenses, the trial court may not conduct a partial verdict inquiry as to the offenses included within the charge. [Citing State v. Bell (Iowa 1982) 322 N.W.2d 93 , 95, State v. McKay (1975) 217 Kan. 11 , 535 P.2d 945 , 947, People v. Hall (1975) 25 Ill.App.3d 992 , 324 N.E.2d 50 , 52-53, Commonwealth v. Roth (2002) 437 Mass. 777 , 776 N.E.2d 437 , 450, People v. Hickey (1981) 103 Mich.App. 350 , 303 N.W | 1 | 2019–2019 |
People v. Kurtzman
green
2 sentences2019Without the rule, a general declaration of mistrial would disguise the fact that the jury agreed the defendant was not guilty of the greater offense, making the defendant subject to retrial on both the greater and lesser offenses." ( Anderson , supra , 47 Cal.4th at p. 114 , 97 Cal.Rptr.3d 77 , 211 P.3d 584 .) We further clarified in People v. Kurtzman (1988) 46 Cal.3d 322 , 250 Cal.Rptr. 244 , 758 P.2d 572 ( Kurtzman ) that, although a jury may consider the charges in any order, "the jury must acquit of the greater offense before returning a verdict on the lesser included offense ...." ( Id . 2019Without the rule, a general declaration of mistrial would disguise the fact that the jury agreed the defendant was not guilty of the greater offense, making the defendant subject to retrial on both the greater and lesser offenses." ( Anderson , supra , 47 Cal.4th at p. 114 , 97 Cal.Rptr.3d 77 , 211 P.3d 584 .) We further clarified in People v. Kurtzman (1988) 46 Cal.3d 322 , 250 Cal.Rptr. 244 , 758 P.2d 572 ( Kurtzman ) that, although a jury may consider the charges in any order, "the jury must acquit of the greater offense before returning a verdict on the lesser included offense ...." ( Id . | 1 | 2019–2019 |
People v. Hickey
green
2 sentences2019As the most recent of the pre- Blueford cases summarizes, "Several other jurisdictions have addressed this issue, and the majority has held that if a single charge includes multiple degrees of offenses, the trial court may not conduct a partial verdict inquiry as to the offenses included within the charge. [Citing State v. Bell (Iowa 1982) 322 N.W.2d 93 , 95, State v. McKay (1975) 217 Kan. 11 , 535 P.2d 945 , 947, People v. Hall (1975) 25 Ill.App.3d 992 , 324 N.E.2d 50 , 52-53, Commonwealth v. Roth (2002) 437 Mass. 777 , 776 N.E.2d 437 , 450, People v. Hickey (1981) 103 Mich.App. 350 , 303 N.W 2019As the most recent of the pre- Blueford cases summarizes, "Several other jurisdictions have addressed this issue, and the majority has held that if a single charge includes multiple degrees of offenses, the trial court may not conduct a partial verdict inquiry as to the offenses included within the charge. [Citing State v. Bell (Iowa 1982) 322 N.W.2d 93 , 95, State v. McKay (1975) 217 Kan. 11 , 535 P.2d 945 , 947, People v. Hall (1975) 25 Ill.App.3d 992 , 324 N.E.2d 50 , 52-53, Commonwealth v. Roth (2002) 437 Mass. 777 , 776 N.E.2d 437 , 450, People v. Hickey (1981) 103 Mich.App. 350 , 303 N.W | 1 | 2019–2019 |
State v. Alvarado
green
2 sentences2019As the most recent of the pre- Blueford cases summarizes, "Several other jurisdictions have addressed this issue, and the majority has held that if a single charge includes multiple degrees of offenses, the trial court may not conduct a partial verdict inquiry as to the offenses included within the charge. [Citing State v. Bell (Iowa 1982) 322 N.W.2d 93 , 95, State v. McKay (1975) 217 Kan. 11 , 535 P.2d 945 , 947, People v. Hall (1975) 25 Ill.App.3d 992 , 324 N.E.2d 50 , 52-53, Commonwealth v. Roth (2002) 437 Mass. 777 , 776 N.E.2d 437 , 450, People v. Hickey (1981) 103 Mich.App. 350 , 303 N.W 2019As the most recent of the pre- Blueford cases summarizes, "Several other jurisdictions have addressed this issue, and the majority has held that if a single charge includes multiple degrees of offenses, the trial court may not conduct a partial verdict inquiry as to the offenses included within the charge. [Citing State v. Bell (Iowa 1982) 322 N.W.2d 93 , 95, State v. McKay (1975) 217 Kan. 11 , 535 P.2d 945 , 947, People v. Hall (1975) 25 Ill.App.3d 992 , 324 N.E.2d 50 , 52-53, Commonwealth v. Roth (2002) 437 Mass. 777 , 776 N.E.2d 437 , 450, People v. Hickey (1981) 103 Mich.App. 350 , 303 N.W | 1 | 2019–2019 |
Bigelow v. Superior Court
green
2 sentences2019The touchstone of a jury verdict of acquittal is the jury's manifestation of a definite and final intent to acquit of the offense." ( Bigelow v. Superior Court (1989) 208 Cal.App.3d 1127 , 1134, 256 Cal.Rptr. 528 .) The Stone rule simply provides a mechanism by which a jury may formally render an acquittal verdict on a greater offense, providing clarity to what otherwise may be considered an informal verdict of acquittal. 2019The touchstone of a jury verdict of acquittal is the jury's manifestation of a definite and final intent to acquit of the offense." ( Bigelow v. Superior Court (1989) 208 Cal.App.3d 1127 , 1134, 256 Cal.Rptr. 528 .) The Stone rule simply provides a mechanism by which a jury may formally render an acquittal verdict on a greater offense, providing clarity to what otherwise may be considered an informal verdict of acquittal. | 1 | 2019–2019 |
State v. Bell
green
2 sentences2019As the most recent of the pre- Blueford cases summarizes, "Several other jurisdictions have addressed this issue, and the majority has held that if a single charge includes multiple degrees of offenses, the trial court may not conduct a partial verdict inquiry as to the offenses included within the charge. [Citing State v. Bell (Iowa 1982) 322 N.W.2d 93 , 95, State v. McKay (1975) 217 Kan. 11 , 535 P.2d 945 , 947, People v. Hall (1975) 25 Ill.App.3d 992 , 324 N.E.2d 50 , 52-53, Commonwealth v. Roth (2002) 437 Mass. 777 , 776 N.E.2d 437 , 450, People v. Hickey (1981) 103 Mich.App. 350 , 303 N.W 2019As the most recent of the pre- Blueford cases summarizes, "Several other jurisdictions have addressed this issue, and the majority has held that if a single charge includes multiple degrees of offenses, the trial court may not conduct a partial verdict inquiry as to the offenses included within the charge. [Citing State v. Bell (Iowa 1982) 322 N.W.2d 93 , 95, State v. McKay (1975) 217 Kan. 11 , 535 P.2d 945 , 947, People v. Hall (1975) 25 Ill.App.3d 992 , 324 N.E.2d 50 , 52-53, Commonwealth v. Roth (2002) 437 Mass. 777 , 776 N.E.2d 437 , 450, People v. Hickey (1981) 103 Mich.App. 350 , 303 N.W | 1 | 2019–2019 |
Whiteaker v. State
green
2 sentences2019As the most recent of the pre- Blueford cases summarizes, "Several other jurisdictions have addressed this issue, and the majority has held that if a single charge includes multiple degrees of offenses, the trial court may not conduct a partial verdict inquiry as to the offenses included within the charge. [Citing State v. Bell (Iowa 1982) 322 N.W.2d 93 , 95, State v. McKay (1975) 217 Kan. 11 , 535 P.2d 945 , 947, People v. Hall (1975) 25 Ill.App.3d 992 , 324 N.E.2d 50 , 52-53, Commonwealth v. Roth (2002) 437 Mass. 777 , 776 N.E.2d 437 , 450, People v. Hickey (1981) 103 Mich.App. 350 , 303 N.W 2019As the most recent of the pre- Blueford cases summarizes, "Several other jurisdictions have addressed this issue, and the majority has held that if a single charge includes multiple degrees of offenses, the trial court may not conduct a partial verdict inquiry as to the offenses included within the charge. [Citing State v. Bell (Iowa 1982) 322 N.W.2d 93 , 95, State v. McKay (1975) 217 Kan. 11 , 535 P.2d 945 , 947, People v. Hall (1975) 25 Ill.App.3d 992 , 324 N.E.2d 50 , 52-53, Commonwealth v. Roth (2002) 437 Mass. 777 , 776 N.E.2d 437 , 450, People v. Hickey (1981) 103 Mich.App. 350 , 303 N.W | 1 | 2019–2019 |
Colorado v. Richardson
green
2 sentences2019As the most recent of the pre- Blueford cases summarizes, "Several other jurisdictions have addressed this issue, and the majority has held that if a single charge includes multiple degrees of offenses, the trial court may not conduct a partial verdict inquiry as to the offenses included within the charge. [Citing State v. Bell (Iowa 1982) 322 N.W.2d 93 , 95, State v. McKay (1975) 217 Kan. 11 , 535 P.2d 945 , 947, People v. Hall (1975) 25 Ill.App.3d 992 , 324 N.E.2d 50 , 52-53, Commonwealth v. Roth (2002) 437 Mass. 777 , 776 N.E.2d 437 , 450, People v. Hickey (1981) 103 Mich.App. 350 , 303 N.W 2019As the most recent of the pre- Blueford cases summarizes, "Several other jurisdictions have addressed this issue, and the majority has held that if a single charge includes multiple degrees of offenses, the trial court may not conduct a partial verdict inquiry as to the offenses included within the charge. [Citing State v. Bell (Iowa 1982) 322 N.W.2d 93 , 95, State v. McKay (1975) 217 Kan. 11 , 535 P.2d 945 , 947, People v. Hall (1975) 25 Ill.App.3d 992 , 324 N.E.2d 50 , 52-53, Commonwealth v. Roth (2002) 437 Mass. 777 , 776 N.E.2d 437 , 450, People v. Hickey (1981) 103 Mich.App. 350 , 303 N.W | 1 | 2019–2019 |
State v. Tate
green
2 sentences2019As the most recent of the pre- Blueford cases summarizes, "Several other jurisdictions have addressed this issue, and the majority has held that if a single charge includes multiple degrees of offenses, the trial court may not conduct a partial verdict inquiry as to the offenses included within the charge. [Citing State v. Bell (Iowa 1982) 322 N.W.2d 93 , 95, State v. McKay (1975) 217 Kan. 11 , 535 P.2d 945 , 947, People v. Hall (1975) 25 Ill.App.3d 992 , 324 N.E.2d 50 , 52-53, Commonwealth v. Roth (2002) 437 Mass. 777 , 776 N.E.2d 437 , 450, People v. Hickey (1981) 103 Mich.App. 350 , 303 N.W 2019As the most recent of the pre- Blueford cases summarizes, "Several other jurisdictions have addressed this issue, and the majority has held that if a single charge includes multiple degrees of offenses, the trial court may not conduct a partial verdict inquiry as to the offenses included within the charge. [Citing State v. Bell (Iowa 1982) 322 N.W.2d 93 , 95, State v. McKay (1975) 217 Kan. 11 , 535 P.2d 945 , 947, People v. Hall (1975) 25 Ill.App.3d 992 , 324 N.E.2d 50 , 52-53, Commonwealth v. Roth (2002) 437 Mass. 777 , 776 N.E.2d 437 , 450, People v. Hickey (1981) 103 Mich.App. 350 , 303 N.W | 1 | 2019–2019 |
State v. Pugliese
green
2 sentences2019As the most recent of the pre- Blueford cases summarizes, "Several other jurisdictions have addressed this issue, and the majority has held that if a single charge includes multiple degrees of offenses, the trial court may not conduct a partial verdict inquiry as to the offenses included within the charge. [Citing State v. Bell (Iowa 1982) 322 N.W.2d 93 , 95, State v. McKay (1975) 217 Kan. 11 , 535 P.2d 945 , 947, People v. Hall (1975) 25 Ill.App.3d 992 , 324 N.E.2d 50 , 52-53, Commonwealth v. Roth (2002) 437 Mass. 777 , 776 N.E.2d 437 , 450, People v. Hickey (1981) 103 Mich.App. 350 , 303 N.W 2019As the most recent of the pre- Blueford cases summarizes, "Several other jurisdictions have addressed this issue, and the majority has held that if a single charge includes multiple degrees of offenses, the trial court may not conduct a partial verdict inquiry as to the offenses included within the charge. [Citing State v. Bell (Iowa 1982) 322 N.W.2d 93 , 95, State v. McKay (1975) 217 Kan. 11 , 535 P.2d 945 , 947, People v. Hall (1975) 25 Ill.App.3d 992 , 324 N.E.2d 50 , 52-53, Commonwealth v. Roth (2002) 437 Mass. 777 , 776 N.E.2d 437 , 450, People v. Hickey (1981) 103 Mich.App. 350 , 303 N.W | 1 | 2019–2019 |
State v. Booker
green
2 sentences2019As the most recent of the pre- Blueford cases summarizes, "Several other jurisdictions have addressed this issue, and the majority has held that if a single charge includes multiple degrees of offenses, the trial court may not conduct a partial verdict inquiry as to the offenses included within the charge. [Citing State v. Bell (Iowa 1982) 322 N.W.2d 93 , 95, State v. McKay (1975) 217 Kan. 11 , 535 P.2d 945 , 947, People v. Hall (1975) 25 Ill.App.3d 992 , 324 N.E.2d 50 , 52-53, Commonwealth v. Roth (2002) 437 Mass. 777 , 776 N.E.2d 437 , 450, People v. Hickey (1981) 103 Mich.App. 350 , 303 N.W 2019As the most recent of the pre- Blueford cases summarizes, "Several other jurisdictions have addressed this issue, and the majority has held that if a single charge includes multiple degrees of offenses, the trial court may not conduct a partial verdict inquiry as to the offenses included within the charge. [Citing State v. Bell (Iowa 1982) 322 N.W.2d 93 , 95, State v. McKay (1975) 217 Kan. 11 , 535 P.2d 945 , 947, People v. Hall (1975) 25 Ill.App.3d 992 , 324 N.E.2d 50 , 52-53, Commonwealth v. Roth (2002) 437 Mass. 777 , 776 N.E.2d 437 , 450, People v. Hickey (1981) 103 Mich.App. 350 , 303 N.W | 1 | 2019–2019 |
Christoff v. Union Pacific Railroad
green
2 sentences2016(See REO Broadcasting, supra, 69 Cal.App.4th at p. 500 ; Claudio, supra, 134 Cal.App.4th at p. 230 ; Christoff, supra, 134 Cal.App.4th at p. 125 .) In any event, for reasons similar to those discussed above, we conclude no triable issues of fact exist concerning Stone’s claim for retaliation under FEHA. 2016(See REO Broadcasting, supra, 69 Cal.App.4th at p. 500 ; Claudio, supra, 134 Cal.App.4th at p. 230 ; Christoff, supra, 134 Cal.App.4th at p. 125 .) In any event, for reasons similar to those discussed above, we conclude no triable issues of fact exist concerning Stone’s claim for retaliation under FEHA. | 1 | 2016–2016 |
Claudio v. Regents of University of Cal.
green
2 sentences2016(See REO Broadcasting, supra, 69 Cal.App.4th at p. 500 ; Claudio, supra, 134 Cal.App.4th at p. 230 ; Christoff, supra, 134 Cal.App.4th at p. 125 .) In any event, for reasons similar to those discussed above, we conclude no triable issues of fact exist concerning Stone’s claim for retaliation under FEHA. 2016(See REO Broadcasting, supra, 69 Cal.App.4th at p. 500 ; Claudio, supra, 134 Cal.App.4th at p. 230 ; Christoff, supra, 134 Cal.App.4th at p. 125 .) In any event, for reasons similar to those discussed above, we conclude no triable issues of fact exist concerning Stone’s claim for retaliation under FEHA. | 1 | 2016–2016 |
REO BROADCASTING CONSULTANTS v. Martin
green
1 sentence2016(See REO Broadcasting, supra, 69 Cal.App.4th at p. 500 ; Claudio, supra, 134 Cal.App.4th at p. 230 ; Christoff, supra, 134 Cal.App.4th at p. 125 .) In any event, for reasons similar to those discussed above, we conclude no triable issues of fact exist concerning Stone’s claim for retaliation under FEHA. | 1 | 2016–2016 |
| Travis v. Travis neutral | 1 | 1978–1978 |
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.