reliable test (California) · Go Syfert
← California issues

reliable test in California

9 California opinions name it 3 courts 1979–2022 1 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 (6)

CaseFollowedCited
Atkins v. Virginiagreen
scotus · 2002 · cited in 1 California opinions naming this issue, 2018–2018
2 sentences

2018The referee found petitioner's WISC score of 70 in 1963 the most reliable assessment of petitioner's IQ before age 18, noting the Wechsler tests are the standard for assessing intellectual functioning (see, e.g., Atkins, supra, 536 U.S. at p. 309, fn. 5 , 122 S.Ct. 2242 ) and that the experts agreed the WISC was "the most reliable test." The referee found the other tests given to petitioner before age 18 were "of questionable reliability." For example, Maloney called the Stanford-Binet **763 "the most biased" of the tests because it "was normed on white young people." Khazanov testified the Re

2018The referee found petitioner's WISC score of 70 in 1963 the most reliable assessment of petitioner's IQ before age 18, noting the Wechsler tests are the standard for assessing intellectual functioning (see, e.g., Atkins, supra, 536 U.S. at p. 309, fn. 5 , 122 S.Ct. 2242 ) and that the experts agreed the WISC was "the most reliable test." The referee found the other tests given to petitioner before age 18 were "of questionable reliability." For example, Maloney called the Stanford-Binet **763 "the most biased" of the tests because it "was normed on white young people." Khazanov testified the Re

11
Castro v. Budget Rent-A-Car System, Inc.green
calctapp · 2007 · cited in 1 California opinions naming this issue, 2010–2010
1 sentence

2010(Accord, Castro, supra, 154 Cal.App.4th 1162, 1181 [Alabama, whose law limited the potential liability of a vehicle owner for the negligence of a permissive user, has an interest “in not having vehicle owners and drivers in its jurisdiction subjected to different liabilities based on the fortuity of which state a plaintiff happens to be a resident. . . .

11
Firlotte v. Jesseegreen
calctapp · 1946 · cited in 1 California opinions naming this issue, 1979–1979
2 sentences

1979(People v. Jones, 42 Cal.2d 219, 222 [ 266 P.2d 38 ]; People v. Warner, 270 Cal.App.2d 900, 907-908 [ 76 Cal.Rptr. 160 ]; Firlotte v. Jessee, 76 Cal.App.2d 207, 210 [ 172 P.2d 710 ].) *880 Apart from the possibility of exclusion of the HLA test by a specific statute and assuming its general acceptance in the scientific community as a reliable test for paternity, the results of the test are clearly probative and therefore relevant in an action to establish paternity.

1979(People v. Jones, 42 Cal.2d 219, 222 [ 266 P.2d 38 ]; People v. Warner, 270 Cal.App.2d 900, 907-908 [ 76 Cal.Rptr. 160 ]; Firlotte v. Jessee, 76 Cal.App.2d 207, 210 [ 172 P.2d 710 ].) *880 Apart from the possibility of exclusion of the HLA test by a specific statute and assuming its general acceptance in the scientific community as a reliable test for paternity, the results of the test are clearly probative and therefore relevant in an action to establish paternity.

11
People v. Jonesgreen
cal · 1954 · cited in 1 California opinions naming this issue, 1979–1979
2 sentences

1979(People v. Jones, 42 Cal.2d 219, 222 [ 266 P.2d 38 ]; People v. Warner, 270 Cal.App.2d 900, 907-908 [ 76 Cal.Rptr. 160 ]; Firlotte v. Jessee, 76 Cal.App.2d 207, 210 [ 172 P.2d 710 ].) *880 Apart from the possibility of exclusion of the HLA test by a specific statute and assuming its general acceptance in the scientific community as a reliable test for paternity, the results of the test are clearly probative and therefore relevant in an action to establish paternity.

1979(People v. Jones, 42 Cal.2d 219, 222 [ 266 P.2d 38 ]; People v. Warner, 270 Cal.App.2d 900, 907-908 [ 76 Cal.Rptr. 160 ]; Firlotte v. Jessee, 76 Cal.App.2d 207, 210 [ 172 P.2d 710 ].) *880 Apart from the possibility of exclusion of the HLA test by a specific statute and assuming its general acceptance in the scientific community as a reliable test for paternity, the results of the test are clearly probative and therefore relevant in an action to establish paternity.

11
People v. Kellyred
cal · 1976 · cited in 1 California opinions naming this issue, 1979–1979
2 sentences

1979For reasons which we shall explain, the contention must be rejected. *886 In People v. Kelly, 17 Cal.3d 24, 30-32 [ 130 Cal.Rptr. 144 , 549 P.2d 1240 ], our Supreme Court reaffirmed its adherence to the traditional test enunciated in Frye v. United States (D.C.

1979For reasons which we shall explain, the contention must be rejected. *886 In People v. Kelly, 17 Cal.3d 24, 30-32 [ 130 Cal.Rptr. 144 , 549 P.2d 1240 ], our Supreme Court reaffirmed its adherence to the traditional test enunciated in Frye v. United States (D.C.

11
People v. Warnergreen
calctapp · 1969 · cited in 1 California opinions naming this issue, 1979–1979
2 sentences

1979(People v. Jones, 42 Cal.2d 219, 222 [ 266 P.2d 38 ]; People v. Warner, 270 Cal.App.2d 900, 907-908 [ 76 Cal.Rptr. 160 ]; Firlotte v. Jessee, 76 Cal.App.2d 207, 210 [ 172 P.2d 710 ].) *880 Apart from the possibility of exclusion of the HLA test by a specific statute and assuming its general acceptance in the scientific community as a reliable test for paternity, the results of the test are clearly probative and therefore relevant in an action to establish paternity.

1979(People v. Jones, 42 Cal.2d 219, 222 [ 266 P.2d 38 ]; People v. Warner, 270 Cal.App.2d 900, 907-908 [ 76 Cal.Rptr. 160 ]; Firlotte v. Jessee, 76 Cal.App.2d 207, 210 [ 172 P.2d 710 ].) *880 Apart from the possibility of exclusion of the HLA test by a specific statute and assuming its general acceptance in the scientific community as a reliable test for paternity, the results of the test are clearly probative and therefore relevant in an action to establish paternity.

11

Distinguished, questioned or overruled (0)

CaseNegativeCited
No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in California. Read the followed side critically anyway.

Also cited on this issue (5)

CaseCitedYears
State v. Henderson green
nj · 2011
2 sentences

2017The greater the number of choices, the more likely the procedure will serve as a reliable test of the witness' ability to distinguish the culprit from an innocent person." ( Henderson , supra , 208 N.J. at p. 251 , 27 A.3d 872 .) There is "no magic number [that] exists, but there appears to be general agreement that a minimum of five fillers should be used." ( Ibid. ) In California, there is no per se requirement, but it appears that a six-pack photo array containing five fillers is the norm.

2017The greater the number of choices, the more likely the procedure will serve as a reliable test of the witness' ability to distinguish the culprit from an innocent person." ( Henderson , supra , 208 N.J. at p. 251 , 27 A.3d 872 .) There is "no magic number [that] exists, but there appears to be general agreement that a minimum of five fillers should be used." ( Ibid. ) In California, there is no per se requirement, but it appears that a six-pack photo array containing five fillers is the norm.

32017–2017
People v. Carlos green
calctapp · 2006
2 sentences

2017(See, e.g., People v. Carlos (2006) 138 Cal.App.4th 907 , 911, 41 Cal.Rptr.3d 873 .) Indeed, the federal guidelines from the Department of Justice state that when composing a photographic lineup the investigator should: "Include a minimum of five fillers (nonsuspects) per identification procedure." (U.S. *798 Dept. of Justice Research Report, Eyewitness Evidence, A Guide for Law Enforcement, supra , at p. 29.) Third, and probably most important, "a suspect should be included in a lineup comprised of look-alikes.

2017(See, e.g., People v. Carlos (2006) 138 Cal.App.4th 907 , 911, 41 Cal.Rptr.3d 873 .) Indeed, the federal guidelines from the Department of Justice state that when composing a photographic lineup the investigator should: "Include a minimum of five fillers (nonsuspects) per identification procedure." (U.S. *798 Dept. of Justice Research Report, Eyewitness Evidence, A Guide for Law Enforcement, supra , at p. 29.) Third, and probably most important, "a suspect should be included in a lineup comprised of look-alikes.

32017–2017
People v. Gallardo green
cal · 2017
1 sentence

2022I would not let Milton continue to serve a Three Strikes term without certainty that this severe punishment is supported by facts “necessarily found in the course of entering [his] prior conviction[s].” (Gallardo, supra, 4 Cal.5th at p. 134 .) Milton should get the chance to be resentenced based upon the more reliable rule we laid out in Gallardo, the very same rule that would apply if he or anyone else were sentenced today.

12022–2022
People v. Fiscalini green
calctapp · 1991
2 sentences

2006Compelling him to take a blood test was a constitutionally reasonable alternative to obtain a reliable test before the blood-alcohol evidence diminished. [Citation.]” (Ibid.) Sugarman also must be compared with People v. Fiscalini (1991) 228 Cal.App.3d 1639 [ 279 Cal.Rptr. 682 ], which reversed a drunk driving conviction because although the defendant voluntarily provided a urine sample, the police later forcibly obtained a blood sample from him.

2006Compelling him to take a blood test was a constitutionally reasonable alternative to obtain a reliable test before the blood-alcohol evidence diminished. [Citation.]” (Ibid.) Sugarman also must be compared with People v. Fiscalini (1991) 228 Cal.App.3d 1639 [ 279 Cal.Rptr. 682 ], which reversed a drunk driving conviction because although the defendant voluntarily provided a urine sample, the police later forcibly obtained a blood sample from him.

12006–2006
In Re Marriage of Neal green
calctapp · 1984
1 sentence

1984(In re Marriage of Neal, supra, 153 Cal.App.3d 117, 121 .) Section 4800.1 also better protects the sanctity of the joint tenancy deed.

11984–1984

Statutes the citing opinions construe

CA § Cal. Evidence Code § 1200 (3) CA § Cal. Evidence Code § 1230 (3) CA § Cal. Evidence Code § 210 (3) CA § Cal. Evidence Code § 240 (3) CA § Cal. Evidence Code § 351 (3) CA § Cal. Evidence Code § 780 (3) CA § Cal. Penal Code § 1473 (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

NJ 13 (1984–2025) OH 12 (1992–2024) CO 12 (1933–2019) WA 9 (1904–2025) CA 9 (1979–2022) NY 5 (1978–2012) IL 5 (1894–2012) WV 4 (2012–2022) NV 4 (1957–1991) KS 4 (1985–2020) VA 3 (1976–1998) OK 3 (1954–2018) MT 3 (1959–1995) AL 3 (1931–2018) MO 3 (1918–1999) TN 2 (1931–2010) IN 2 (2006–2020) FL 2 (2000–2001) HI 2 (2010–2013) UT 2 (2025–2026) TX 2 (1923–2016)

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