Marks rule (California) · Go Syfert
← California issues

Marks rule in California

6 California opinions name it 2 courts 2012–2021 2 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 (3)

CaseFollowedCited
Marks v. United Statesgreen
scotus · 1977 · cited in 2 California opinions naming this issue, 2012–2016
2 sentences

2016When a fragmented court decides a case, and no single rationale enjoys the assent of five justices, “ ‘the holding of the Court may be viewed as that position taken by those Members who concurred in the judgments on the narrowest grounds.’ ” (Marks v. United States (1977) 430 U.S. 188, 193 [ 51 L.Ed.2d 260 , 97 S.Ct. 990 ] (Marks).) Amicus curiae American Civil Liberties Union *853 (ACLU) asserts the strict scrutiny test is warranted, but fails to explain why the Marks rule does not apply. 8 Even without considering Marks, we believe section 31 is a content-neutral provision.

2016When a fragmented court decides a case, and no single rationale enjoys the assent of five justices, “ ‘the holding of the Court may be viewed as that position taken by those Members who concurred in the judgments on the narrowest grounds.’ ” (Marks v. United States (1977) 430 U.S. 188, 193 [ 51 L.Ed.2d 260 , 97 S.Ct. 990 ] (Marks).) Amicus curiae American Civil Liberties Union *853 (ACLU) asserts the strict scrutiny test is warranted, but fails to explain why the Marks rule does not apply. 8 Even without considering Marks, we believe section 31 is a content-neutral provision.

12
L.A. All. for Survival v. City of Los Angelesgreen
cal · 2000 · cited in 1 California opinions naming this issue, 2016–2016
2 sentences

2016A statute may be content neutral if it “ ‘serves purposes unrelated to the content of the expression’ ” even if it “ ‘has an incidental effect on some speakers or messages but not others.’ ” (Los Angeles Alliance for Survival v. City of Los Angeles (2000) 22 Cal.4th 352, 368 [ 93 Cal.Rptr.2d 1 , 993 P.2d 334 ], quoting Ward v. Rock Against Racism (1989) 491 U.S 781, 791 [ 105 L.Ed.2d 661 , 109 S.Ct. 2746 ].) For example a city may place restrictions on solicitations for immediate donations if it is “predominately . . . addressed to the inherently intrusive and potentially coercive nature of th

2016A statute may be content neutral if it “ ‘serves purposes unrelated to the content of the expression’ ” even if it “ ‘has an incidental effect on some speakers or messages but not others.’ ” (Los Angeles Alliance for Survival v. City of Los Angeles (2000) 22 Cal.4th 352, 368 [ 93 Cal.Rptr.2d 1 , 993 P.2d 334 ], quoting Ward v. Rock Against Racism (1989) 491 U.S 781, 791 [ 105 L.Ed.2d 661 , 109 S.Ct. 2746 ].) For example a city may place restrictions on solicitations for immediate donations if it is “predominately . . . addressed to the inherently intrusive and potentially coercive nature of th

11
People v. Dungogreen
cal · 2012 · cited in 1 California opinions naming this issue, 2013–2013
2 sentences

2013(Dungo, supra, 55 Cal.4th at p. 628 (conc. opn. of Chin, J.).) However, a legal opinion that commanded a majority of the Supreme Court is not required to find that court‟s reasoning.

2013(Dungo, supra, 55 Cal.4th at p. 628 (conc. opn. of Chin, J.).) However, a legal opinion that commanded a majority of the Supreme Court is not required to find that court‟s reasoning.

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
People v. Camino green
calctapp · 2010
2 sentences

2021(Id. at p. 1370.) 24 This case is distinguishable from Camino, in which the defendant’s involvement in the shooting was more peripheral, and the police had a credible explanation for why they did not know if Camino was present at the shooting when they began the interview. ( Camino, supra, 188 Cal.App.4th at pp. 1374-1375.) Here, Sumagang was the sole suspect in Sangco’s death, and the police had abundant evidence of his involvement.

2021(Id. at p. 1370.) 24 This case is distinguishable from Camino, in which the defendant’s involvement in the shooting was more peripheral, and the police had a credible explanation for why they did not know if Camino was present at the shooting when they began the interview. ( Camino, supra, 188 Cal.App.4th at pp. 1374-1375.) Here, Sumagang was the sole suspect in Sangco’s death, and the police had abundant evidence of his involvement.

22021–2021
Ward v. Rock Against Racism green
scotus · 1989
2 sentences

2016A statute may be content neutral if it “ ‘serves purposes unrelated to the content of the expression’ ” even if it “ ‘has an incidental effect on some speakers or messages but not others.’ ” (Los Angeles Alliance for Survival v. City of Los Angeles (2000) 22 Cal.4th 352, 368 [ 93 Cal.Rptr.2d 1 , 993 P.2d 334 ], quoting Ward v. Rock Against Racism (1989) 491 U.S 781, 791 [ 105 L.Ed.2d 661 , 109 S.Ct. 2746 ].) For example a city may place restrictions on solicitations for immediate donations if it is “predominately . . . addressed to the inherently intrusive and potentially coercive nature of th

2016A statute may be content neutral if it “ ‘serves purposes unrelated to the content of the expression’ ” even if it “ ‘has an incidental effect on some speakers or messages but not others.’ ” (Los Angeles Alliance for Survival v. City of Los Angeles (2000) 22 Cal.4th 352, 368 [ 93 Cal.Rptr.2d 1 , 993 P.2d 334 ], quoting Ward v. Rock Against Racism (1989) 491 U.S 781, 791 [ 105 L.Ed.2d 661 , 109 S.Ct. 2746 ].) For example a city may place restrictions on solicitations for immediate donations if it is “predominately . . . addressed to the inherently intrusive and potentially coercive nature of th

12016–2016
People v. Cruz green
cal · 2008
1 sentence

2013A valid waiver need not be of predetermined form, but instead must reflect that the suspect in fact knowingly and voluntarily waived the rights delineated in the Miranda decision. [Citation.] We have recognized that a valid waiver of Miranda rights may be express or implied. [Citations.] A suspect’s expressed willingness to answer questions after acknowledging an understanding of his or her Miranda rights has itself been held sufficient to constitute an implied waiver of such rights. [Citations.] In contrast, an unambiguous request for counsel or a refusal to talk bars further questioning. [Ci

12013–2013
Miranda v. Arizona green
scotus · 1966
1 sentence

2013Code, §§ 451, 452.) 5 Based on the court’s ruling, Marks suggests the court engaged in judicial misconduct, claiming “the court wrongly assisted the prosecutor in coming up with other questionable and unsubstantiated reasons to get rid of [A.V.] as a juror.” As the above- quoted portions of the record indicate, Marks’s claim is utterly meritless. 7 enforcement agencies to advise a suspect, before any custodial law enforcement questioning, that “he has the right to remain silent, that anything he says can be used against him in a court of law, that he has the right to the presence of an attorne

12013–2013
People v. Martinez green
cal · 2010
1 sentence

2013Code, §§ 451, 452.) 5 Based on the court’s ruling, Marks suggests the court engaged in judicial misconduct, claiming “the court wrongly assisted the prosecutor in coming up with other questionable and unsubstantiated reasons to get rid of [A.V.] as a juror.” As the above- quoted portions of the record indicate, Marks’s claim is utterly meritless. 7 enforcement agencies to advise a suspect, before any custodial law enforcement questioning, that “he has the right to remain silent, that anything he says can be used against him in a court of law, that he has the right to the presence of an attorne

12013–2013

Statutes the citing opinions construe

CA § Cal. Penal Code § 187 (4)

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

TX 12 (1996–2025) CA 6 (2012–2021) TN 6 (1993–2014) PA 6 (1998–2025) MD 5 (2011–2016) GA 4 (1999–2022) IL 4 (2007–2018) AL 4 (2012–2014) WA 3 (2010–2024) KS 3 (1990–2022) CO 3 (2013–2018) WI 3 (1994–2023) DC 2 (2007–2013) OR 2 (2020–2022) IN 2 (2013–2020) ID 2 (1991–2017)

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