7 California opinions name it 2 courts 1911–1997 0 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. Andre R.green2 sentences1997If it is so incorporated, it shall be negatived, otherwise it is a matter of defense.” ’ Thus, where exceptions or provisos are not descriptive of the offense, or define it, but rather afford a matter of excuse, ‘they are to be relied on in [the] defense.’ [Citations.]” [In re Andre R. (1984) 158 Cal.App.3d 336, 341-342 [ 204 Cal.Rptr. 723 ], italics added, citing Ex Parte Hornef (1908) 154 Cal. 355, 360 [ 97 P. 891 ].) *1365 “It is settled that the privilege of possessing a narcotic must be shown affirmatively by the defendant.” (People v. Marschalk (1962) 206 Cal.App.2d 346, 349 [ 23 Cal.Rpt 1997If it is so incorporated, it shall be negatived, otherwise it is a matter of defense.” ’ Thus, where exceptions or provisos are not descriptive of the offense, or define it, but rather afford a matter of excuse, ‘they are to be relied on in [the] defense.’ [Citations.]” [In re Andre R. (1984) 158 Cal.App.3d 336, 341-342 [ 204 Cal.Rptr. 723 ], italics added, citing Ex Parte Hornef (1908) 154 Cal. 355, 360 [ 97 P. 891 ].) *1365 “It is settled that the privilege of possessing a narcotic must be shown affirmatively by the defendant.” (People v. Marschalk (1962) 206 Cal.App.2d 346, 349 [ 23 Cal.Rpt | 2 | 2 |
People v. Marschalkgreen2 sentences1997If it is so incorporated, it shall be negatived, otherwise it is a matter of defense.” ’ Thus, where exceptions or provisos are not descriptive of the offense, or define it, but rather afford a matter of excuse, ‘they are to be relied on in [the] defense.’ [Citations.]” [In re Andre R. (1984) 158 Cal.App.3d 336, 341-342 [ 204 Cal.Rptr. 723 ], italics added, citing Ex Parte Hornef (1908) 154 Cal. 355, 360 [ 97 P. 891 ].) *1365 “It is settled that the privilege of possessing a narcotic must be shown affirmatively by the defendant.” (People v. Marschalk (1962) 206 Cal.App.2d 346, 349 [ 23 Cal.Rpt 1997If it is so incorporated, it shall be negatived, otherwise it is a matter of defense.” ’ Thus, where exceptions or provisos are not descriptive of the offense, or define it, but rather afford a matter of excuse, ‘they are to be relied on in [the] defense.’ [Citations.]” [In re Andre R. (1984) 158 Cal.App.3d 336, 341-342 [ 204 Cal.Rptr. 723 ], italics added, citing Ex Parte Hornef (1908) 154 Cal. 355, 360 [ 97 P. 891 ].) *1365 “It is settled that the privilege of possessing a narcotic must be shown affirmatively by the defendant.” (People v. Marschalk (1962) 206 Cal.App.2d 346, 349 [ 23 Cal.Rpt | 1 | 1 |
Ex Parte Hornefgreen2 sentences1997If it is so incorporated, it shall be negatived, otherwise it is a matter of defense.” ’ Thus, where exceptions or provisos are not descriptive of the offense, or define it, but rather afford a matter of excuse, ‘they are to be relied on in [the] defense.’ [Citations.]” [In re Andre R. (1984) 158 Cal.App.3d 336, 341-342 [ 204 Cal.Rptr. 723 ], italics added, citing Ex Parte Hornef (1908) 154 Cal. 355, 360 [ 97 P. 891 ].) *1365 “It is settled that the privilege of possessing a narcotic must be shown affirmatively by the defendant.” (People v. Marschalk (1962) 206 Cal.App.2d 346, 349 [ 23 Cal.Rpt 1997If it is so incorporated, it shall be negatived, otherwise it is a matter of defense.” ’ Thus, where exceptions or provisos are not descriptive of the offense, or define it, but rather afford a matter of excuse, ‘they are to be relied on in [the] defense.’ [Citations.]” [In re Andre R. (1984) 158 Cal.App.3d 336, 341-342 [ 204 Cal.Rptr. 723 ], italics added, citing Ex Parte Hornef (1908) 154 Cal. 355, 360 [ 97 P. 891 ].) *1365 “It is settled that the privilege of possessing a narcotic must be shown affirmatively by the defendant.” (People v. Marschalk (1962) 206 Cal.App.2d 346, 349 [ 23 Cal.Rpt | 1 | 1 |
People v. Ruddickgreen2 sentences1984If it is so incorporated, it shall be negatived, otherwise it is a matter of defense.’” Thus, where exceptions or provisos are not descriptive of the offense, or define it, but rather afford a matter of excuse, “they are to be relied on in [the] defense.” (Id., atp. 360; People v. Lawrence, supra, 198 Cal.App.2d at pp. 62-63; People v. Mason, supra, 184 Cal.App.2d at p. 356 ; see also People v. Ruddick (1930) 107 Cal.App. 785, 793 [ 288 P. 45 ].) Here, the existence of written parental permission does not define or describe the offense. 1984If it is so incorporated, it shall be negatived, otherwise it is a matter of defense.’” Thus, where exceptions or provisos are not descriptive of the offense, or define it, but rather afford a matter of excuse, “they are to be relied on in [the] defense.” (Id., atp. 360; People v. Lawrence, supra, 198 Cal.App.2d at pp. 62-63; People v. Mason, supra, 184 Cal.App.2d at p. 356 ; see also People v. Ruddick (1930) 107 Cal.App. 785, 793 [ 288 P. 45 ].) Here, the existence of written parental permission does not define or describe the offense. | 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. Fowler
green
2 sentences1939If it is so incorporated, it shall be negatived, otherwise it is a matter of defense. ’ The court further said that such exceptions and provisos were to be negatived in the pleading only where they are descriptive of the offense or define it, and that where they afford matter of excuse merely, they are to be relied on in defense.” A number of cases to the same effect are cited in our recent decision of People v. Fowler, (1938) 32 Cal. App. (2d) (Supp.) 737 [ 84 Pac. (2d) 326, 329 ], and a multitude of others may be found in 14 California Jurisprudence, 52; 31 C. 1939If it is so incorporated, it shall be negatived, otherwise it is a matter of defense.' The court further said that such exceptions and provisos were to be negatived in the pleading only where they are descriptive of the offense or define it, and that where they afford matter of excuse merely, they are to be relied on in defense." A number of cases to the same effect are cited in our recent decision of People v. Fowler, (1938) 32 Cal.App.2d Supp. 737 [84 PaCal.2d 326, 329], and a multitude of others may be found in 14 California Jurisprudence, 52; 31 C.J. 720, and in the American Digest System, | 2 | 1939–1939 |
People v. Mason
green
1 sentence1984If it is so incorporated, it shall be negatived, otherwise it is a matter of defense.’” Thus, where exceptions or provisos are not descriptive of the offense, or define it, but rather afford a matter of excuse, “they are to be relied on in [the] defense.” (Id., atp. 360; People v. Lawrence, supra, 198 Cal.App.2d at pp. 62-63; People v. Mason, supra, 184 Cal.App.2d at p. 356 ; see also People v. Ruddick (1930) 107 Cal.App. 785, 793 [ 288 P. 45 ].) Here, the existence of written parental permission does not define or describe the offense. | 1 | 1984–1984 |
Territory v. Burns
neutral
1 sentence1912When the exception is not a part of the definition of the offense, and in this way does not therefore become a part of the enacting clause, it is a matter of defense.” (Territory v. Burns, 6 Mont. 72 , [ 9 Pac. 432 ].) The offense with which petitioner was charged was selling intoxicating drinks to a minor. | 1 | 1912–1912 |
Fleming v. . the People
green
1 sentence1911In Fleming v. People, 27 N. Y. 329 , the statute declared that every person having a wife living who shall marry any other person, “except in cases specified in the next *175 section,” shall be adjudged guilty of bigamy. | 1 | 1911–1911 |
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.