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.
9 California opinions name it 2 courts 1975–2025 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 |
|---|---|---|
Haraguchi v. Superior Courtgreen2 sentences2017(People v. Eubanks (1996) 14 Cal.4th 580, 594 [ 59 Cal.Rptr.2d 200 , 927 P.2d 310 ].) Sechon 1424 does not authorize disqualification merely because the defense has shown that the prosecutor’s involvement ‘would be unseemly, would appear improper, or would tend to reduce public confidence in the impartiality and integrity of the criminal justice system.’ (Eubanks, at p. 592.) Instead, it is defendant’s burden to allege facts which, if credited, establish (1) a ‘conflict of interest,’ and (2) that the conflict is ‘so grave as to make a “fair trial” unlikely.’ (Id. at p. 593.)[ 3 ] ‘Thus, the fi 2017(People v. Eubanks (1996) 14 Cal.4th 580, 594 [ 59 Cal.Rptr.2d 200 , 927 P.2d 310 ].) Sechon 1424 does not authorize disqualification merely because the defense has shown that the prosecutor’s involvement ‘would be unseemly, would appear improper, or would tend to reduce public confidence in the impartiality and integrity of the criminal justice system.’ (Eubanks, at p. 592.) Instead, it is defendant’s burden to allege facts which, if credited, establish (1) a ‘conflict of interest,’ and (2) that the conflict is ‘so grave as to make a “fair trial” unlikely.’ (Id. at p. 593.)[ 3 ] ‘Thus, the fi | 3 | 3 |
People v. Eubanksgreen2 sentences2017(People v. Eubanks (1996) 14 Cal.4th 580, 594 [ 59 Cal.Rptr.2d 200 , 927 P.2d 310 ].) Sechon 1424 does not authorize disqualification merely because the defense has shown that the prosecutor’s involvement ‘would be unseemly, would appear improper, or would tend to reduce public confidence in the impartiality and integrity of the criminal justice system.’ (Eubanks, at p. 592.) Instead, it is defendant’s burden to allege facts which, if credited, establish (1) a ‘conflict of interest,’ and (2) that the conflict is ‘so grave as to make a “fair trial” unlikely.’ (Id. at p. 593.)[ 3 ] ‘Thus, the fi 2017(People v. Eubanks (1996) 14 Cal.4th 580, 594 [ 59 Cal.Rptr.2d 200 , 927 P.2d 310 ].) Sechon 1424 does not authorize disqualification merely because the defense has shown that the prosecutor’s involvement ‘would be unseemly, would appear improper, or would tend to reduce public confidence in the impartiality and integrity of the criminal justice system.’ (Eubanks, at p. 592.) Instead, it is defendant’s burden to allege facts which, if credited, establish (1) a ‘conflict of interest,’ and (2) that the conflict is ‘so grave as to make a “fair trial” unlikely.’ (Id. at p. 593.)[ 3 ] ‘Thus, the fi | 2 | 2 |
People v. Superior Courtgreen2 sentences2014(Hollywood v. Superior Court (2008) 43 Cal.4th 721, 728 [ 76 Cal.Rptr.3d 264 , 182 P.3d 590 ].) “Accordingly, we ask whether the trial court’s findings of fact are supported by substantial evidence, whether its rulings of law are correct, and whether its application of the law to the facts was neither arbitrary nor capricious. [Citation.]” (People v. Superior Court (Humberto S.) (2008) 43 Cal.4th 737, 746 [ 76 Cal.Rptr.3d 276 , 182 P.3d 600 ] (Humberto S.).) 2 Section 1424 requires the defendant serve a motion to disqualify on the district attorney and the Attorney General at least 10 court da 2013Factual issues are resolved under the substantial evidence test: whether there is substantial evidence to support factual determinations reached by the trial court. [Citations.] Once the pertinent factual issues are settled, the question whether the trial court‘s ruling should be upheld is determined under the deferential abuse of discretion test. [Citations.]‘ [Citation.]‖ (People v. Jenan (2006) 140 Cal.App.4th 782, 792 ; see also People v. Superior Court (Humberto S.) (2008) 43 Cal.4th 737, 746 .) Even if we assume defendant satisfied the first prong of the section 1424 disqualification tes | 2 | 2 |
Fielder v. City of Glendalegreen2 sentences2023(Huckey, supra, 37 Cal.App.5th at p. 1108 ; see also Fielder, supra, 71 Cal.App.3d at p. 734 .) “The court should also look at other factors such as whether the accident occurred at night in an unlighted area.” (Fielder, at p. 734.) C. 2023(Huckey, supra, 37 Cal.App.5th at p. 1108 ; see also Fielder, supra, 71 Cal.App.3d at p. 734 .) “The court should also look at other factors such as whether the accident occurred at night in an unlighted area.” (Fielder, at p. 734.) C. | 1 | 1 |
People v. Hamiltongreen2 sentences2017(People v. Eubanks (1996) 14 Cal.4th 580, 594 [ 59 Cal.Rptr.2d 200 , 927 P.2d 310 ].) Sechon 1424 does not authorize disqualification merely because the defense has shown that the prosecutor’s involvement ‘would be unseemly, would appear improper, or would tend to reduce public confidence in the impartiality and integrity of the criminal justice system.’ (Eubanks, at p. 592.) Instead, it is defendant’s burden to allege facts which, if credited, establish (1) a ‘conflict of interest,’ and (2) that the conflict is ‘so grave as to make a “fair trial” unlikely.’ (Id. at p. 593.)[ 3 ] ‘Thus, the fi 2017(People v. Eubanks (1996) 14 Cal.4th 580, 594 [ 59 Cal.Rptr.2d 200 , 927 P.2d 310 ].) Sechon 1424 does not authorize disqualification merely because the defense has shown that the prosecutor’s involvement ‘would be unseemly, would appear improper, or would tend to reduce public confidence in the impartiality and integrity of the criminal justice system.’ (Eubanks, at p. 592.) Instead, it is defendant’s burden to allege facts which, if credited, establish (1) a ‘conflict of interest,’ and (2) that the conflict is ‘so grave as to make a “fair trial” unlikely.’ (Id. at p. 593.)[ 3 ] ‘Thus, the fi | 1 | 1 |
Millsap v. Superior Courtgreen2 sentences2017(People v. Eubanks (1996) 14 Cal.4th 580, 594 [ 59 Cal.Rptr.2d 200 , 927 P.2d 310 ].) Sechon 1424 does not authorize disqualification merely because the defense has shown that the prosecutor’s involvement ‘would be unseemly, would appear improper, or would tend to reduce public confidence in the impartiality and integrity of the criminal justice system.’ (Eubanks, at p. 592.) Instead, it is defendant’s burden to allege facts which, if credited, establish (1) a ‘conflict of interest,’ and (2) that the conflict is ‘so grave as to make a “fair trial” unlikely.’ (Id. at p. 593.)[ 3 ] ‘Thus, the fi 2017(People v. Eubanks (1996) 14 Cal.4th 580, 594 [ 59 Cal.Rptr.2d 200 , 927 P.2d 310 ].) Sechon 1424 does not authorize disqualification merely because the defense has shown that the prosecutor’s involvement ‘would be unseemly, would appear improper, or would tend to reduce public confidence in the impartiality and integrity of the criminal justice system.’ (Eubanks, at p. 592.) Instead, it is defendant’s burden to allege facts which, if credited, establish (1) a ‘conflict of interest,’ and (2) that the conflict is ‘so grave as to make a “fair trial” unlikely.’ (Id. at p. 593.)[ 3 ] ‘Thus, the fi | 1 | 1 |
People v. Bryant, Smith and Wheelergreen2 sentences2017(People v. Eubanks (1996) 14 Cal.4th 580, 594 [ 59 Cal.Rptr.2d 200 , 927 P.2d 310 ].) Sechon 1424 does not authorize disqualification merely because the defense has shown that the prosecutor’s involvement ‘would be unseemly, would appear improper, or would tend to reduce public confidence in the impartiality and integrity of the criminal justice system.’ (Eubanks, at p. 592.) Instead, it is defendant’s burden to allege facts which, if credited, establish (1) a ‘conflict of interest,’ and (2) that the conflict is ‘so grave as to make a “fair trial” unlikely.’ (Id. at p. 593.)[ 3 ] ‘Thus, the fi 2017(People v. Eubanks (1996) 14 Cal.4th 580, 594 [ 59 Cal.Rptr.2d 200 , 927 P.2d 310 ].) Sechon 1424 does not authorize disqualification merely because the defense has shown that the prosecutor’s involvement ‘would be unseemly, would appear improper, or would tend to reduce public confidence in the impartiality and integrity of the criminal justice system.’ (Eubanks, at p. 592.) Instead, it is defendant’s burden to allege facts which, if credited, establish (1) a ‘conflict of interest,’ and (2) that the conflict is ‘so grave as to make a “fair trial” unlikely.’ (Id. at p. 593.)[ 3 ] ‘Thus, the fi | 1 | 1 |
Hollywood v. Superior Courtgreen2 sentences2014(Hollywood v. Superior Court (2008) 43 Cal.4th 721, 728 [ 76 Cal.Rptr.3d 264 , 182 P.3d 590 ].) “Accordingly, we ask whether the trial court’s findings of fact are supported by substantial evidence, whether its rulings of law are correct, and whether its application of the law to the facts was neither arbitrary nor capricious. [Citation.]” (People v. Superior Court (Humberto S.) (2008) 43 Cal.4th 737, 746 [ 76 Cal.Rptr.3d 276 , 182 P.3d 600 ] (Humberto S.).) 2 Section 1424 requires the defendant serve a motion to disqualify on the district attorney and the Attorney General at least 10 court da 2014(Hollywood v. Superior Court (2008) 43 Cal.4th 721, 728 [ 76 Cal.Rptr.3d 264 , 182 P.3d 590 ].) “Accordingly, we ask whether the trial court’s findings of fact are supported by substantial evidence, whether its rulings of law are correct, and whether its application of the law to the facts was neither arbitrary nor capricious. [Citation.]” (People v. Superior Court (Humberto S.) (2008) 43 Cal.4th 737, 746 [ 76 Cal.Rptr.3d 276 , 182 P.3d 600 ] (Humberto S.).) 2 Section 1424 requires the defendant serve a motion to disqualify on the district attorney and the Attorney General at least 10 court da | 1 | 1 |
People v. Vasquezgreen1 sentence2008Under the first part, a court must determine whether a conflict exists, that is, whether “the circumstances of a case evidence a reasonable possibility that the DA’s office may not exercise its discretionary function in an evenhanded manner.” (People v. Conner, supra, 34 Cal.3d at p. 148; accord, People v. Eubanks, supra, 14 Cal.4th at p. 594.) If such a conflict exists, the court must further determine whether the conflict is “ ‘ “so grave as to render it unlikely that defendant will receive fair treatment during all portions of the criminal proceedings.” ’ ” (People v. Vasquez, supra, 39 Cal | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in California. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Acquire II, Ltd. v. Colton Real Estate Group
green
1 sentence2025Because Richard did not request a statement of decision or provide a record of any oral findings, he “waive[d] any objection to the trial court’s failure to make all findings necessary to support its decision.” (Acquire II, Ltd. v. Colton Real Estate Group (2013) 213 Cal.App.4th 959 , 970 7 Similarly, Code of Civil Procedure section 632 states, in part: “In superior courts, upon the trial of a question of fact by the court, written findings of fact and conclusions of law shall not be required. | 1 | 2025–2025 |
Beck v. City of Palo Alto
green
1 sentence2023(See Beck v. Palo Alto (1957) 150 Cal.App.2d 39, 41-42 .) Factors considered in the second half of the analysis include the presence—or lack of presence—of “broken concrete pieces or jagged concrete edges in the height differential or seam between the two concrete panels at the time plaintiff fell,” and whether it is known that another person has tripped and fallen on the same defect, and that, as far as the City knew, no other persons other than plaintiff had tripped or fallen on the height differential. | 1 | 2023–2023 |
Huckey v. City of Temecula
green
1 sentence2023(Huckey, supra, 37 Cal.App.5th at p. 1108 ; see also Fielder, supra, 71 Cal.App.3d at p. 734 .) “The court should also look at other factors such as whether the accident occurred at night in an unlighted area.” (Fielder, at p. 734.) C. | 1 | 2023–2023 |
People v. Flores
green
1 sentence2022However, evidence that the defendant made such a statement cannot prove guilt by itself.’ Ultimately, the Court finds that it is a triable issue of fact for the Jury to determine 7 whether or not there was a false statement made or not.” The trial court’s ruling was appropriate as substantial evidence supported the giving of CALCRIM No. 362 to the jury. “ ‘False statements regarding incriminating circumstances constitute evidence which may support an inference of consciousness of guilt. [Citations.]’ ” (People v. Flores (2007) 157 Cal.App.4th 216, 221 .) A case’s evidence warrants the giving o | 1 | 2022–2022 |
People v. Coffman
green
1 sentence2022However, evidence that the defendant made such a statement cannot prove guilt by itself.’ Ultimately, the Court finds that it is a triable issue of fact for the Jury to determine 7 whether or not there was a false statement made or not.” The trial court’s ruling was appropriate as substantial evidence supported the giving of CALCRIM No. 362 to the jury. “ ‘False statements regarding incriminating circumstances constitute evidence which may support an inference of consciousness of guilt. [Citations.]’ ” (People v. Flores (2007) 157 Cal.App.4th 216, 221 .) A case’s evidence warrants the giving o | 1 | 2022–2022 |
People v. Jenan
green
1 sentence2013Factual issues are resolved under the substantial evidence test: whether there is substantial evidence to support factual determinations reached by the trial court. [Citations.] Once the pertinent factual issues are settled, the question whether the trial court‘s ruling should be upheld is determined under the deferential abuse of discretion test. [Citations.]‘ [Citation.]‖ (People v. Jenan (2006) 140 Cal.App.4th 782, 792 ; see also People v. Superior Court (Humberto S.) (2008) 43 Cal.4th 737, 746 .) Even if we assume defendant satisfied the first prong of the section 1424 disqualification tes | 1 | 2013–2013 |
People v. Benson
green
2 sentences1975“It is true rape is a most detestable crime, and therefore ought severely and impartially to be punished with death; but it must be remembered, that it is an accusation easily to be made and hard to be proved, and harder to be defended by the party accused, tho never so innocent.” (1 Hale, supra, at p. 635.) Hale then recounted several examples of prosecutions for rape which proved to have been maliciously instigated by false accusations, and concluded the chapter with the prescription of caution upon which the second half of the instruction herein at issue is based: “I only mention these inst 1975“It is true rape is a most detestable crime, and therefore ought severely and impartially to be punished with death; but it must be remembered, that it is an accusation easily to be made and hard to be proved, and harder to be defended by the party accused, tho never so innocent.” (1 Hale, supra, at p. 635.) Hale then recounted several examples of prosecutions for rape which proved to have been maliciously instigated by false accusations, and concluded the chapter with the prescription of caution upon which the second half of the instruction herein at issue is based: “I only mention these inst | 1 | 1975–1975 |
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.