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.
6 California opinions name it 2 courts 1969–2023 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.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
People v. Stroudgreen2 sentences1976(Lego v. Twomey (1972) 404 U.S. 477 . 486 [ 30 L.Ed.2d 618, 625-626 , 92 S.Ct. 619 ].) It is stated in People v. Jackson (1971) 19 Cal.App.3d 95 [ 96 Cal.Rptr. 414 ], however, that “the burden is on the prosecution to establish waiver and voluntariness beyond a reasonable doubt.” (Id., at p. 101; see other Court of Appeal opinions in accord with Jackson: People v. Daniels (1969) 1 Cal.App.3d 367, 374 [ 81 Cal.Rptr. 675 ]; People v. Stroud (1969) 273 Cal.App.2d 670, 677-678 [ 78 Cal.Rptr. 270 ].) We do not now express any view as to the nature of the People’s burden of proof of the voluntarines 1976(Lego v. Twomey (1972) 404 U.S. 477 . 486 [ 30 L.Ed.2d 618, 625-626 , 92 S.Ct. 619 ].) It is stated in People v. Jackson (1971) 19 Cal.App.3d 95 [ 96 Cal.Rptr. 414 ], however, that “the burden is on the prosecution to establish waiver and voluntariness beyond a reasonable doubt.” (Id., at p. 101; see other Court of Appeal opinions in accord with Jackson: People v. Daniels (1969) 1 Cal.App.3d 367, 374 [ 81 Cal.Rptr. 675 ]; People v. Stroud (1969) 273 Cal.App.2d 670, 677-678 [ 78 Cal.Rptr. 270 ].) We do not now express any view as to the nature of the People’s burden of proof of the voluntarines | 3 | 3 |
People v. Davisgreen2 sentences1971(People v. Gonsalves, 275 Cal.App.2d 724, 727-728 [ 80 Cal.Rptr. 340 ]; People v. Jones, 221 Cal.App.2d 37, 40-41 [ 34 Cal.Rptr. 267 ].) Third, while the burden is on the prosecution to establish waiver and voluntariness beyond a reasonable doubt (People v. Davis, 66 Cal.2d 175, 180-181 [ 57 Cal.Rptr. 130 , 424 P.2d 682 ]), on appeal the determination below will not be set aside unless it is “palpably erroneous.” (People *101 v. Midkiff, 262 Cal.App.2d 734, 739 [ 68 Cal.Rptr. 866 ].) In that regard, it is not the function of the reviewing court to resolve conflicts in the evidence, to reweigh 1971(People v. Gonsalves, 275 Cal.App.2d 724, 727-728 [ 80 Cal.Rptr. 340 ]; People v. Jones, 221 Cal.App.2d 37, 40-41 [ 34 Cal.Rptr. 267 ].) Third, while the burden is on the prosecution to establish waiver and voluntariness beyond a reasonable doubt (People v. Davis, 66 Cal.2d 175, 180-181 [ 57 Cal.Rptr. 130 , 424 P.2d 682 ]), on appeal the determination below will not be set aside unless it is “palpably erroneous.” (People *101 v. Midkiff, 262 Cal.App.2d 734, 739 [ 68 Cal.Rptr. 866 ].) In that regard, it is not the function of the reviewing court to resolve conflicts in the evidence, to reweigh | 2 | 2 |
Herring v. United Statesgreen2 sentences2023(Herring v. United States (2009) 555 U.S. 135, 137 [ 172 L.Ed.2d 496 ] (Herring).) Under the good faith exception to the exclusionary rule, “evidence will not be suppressed if the police officer had an objectively reasonable belief the search or seizure was constitutionally permissible.” (Pearl, at p. 1292.) The burden is on the prosecution to establish the exception applies, including the burden of proving that a recordkeeping error that led to the unlawful search was not the fault of any part of the law enforcement team. 2023(Herring v. United States (2009) 555 U.S. 135, 137 [ 172 L.Ed.2d 496 ] (Herring).) Under the good faith exception to the exclusionary rule, “evidence will not be suppressed if the police officer had an objectively reasonable belief the search or seizure was constitutionally permissible.” (Pearl, at p. 1292.) The burden is on the prosecution to establish the exception applies, including the burden of proving that a recordkeeping error that led to the unlawful search was not the fault of any part of the law enforcement team. | 1 | 1 |
People v. Danielsgreen2 sentences1976(Lego v. Twomey (1972) 404 U.S. 477 . 486 [ 30 L.Ed.2d 618, 625-626 , 92 S.Ct. 619 ].) It is stated in People v. Jackson (1971) 19 Cal.App.3d 95 [ 96 Cal.Rptr. 414 ], however, that “the burden is on the prosecution to establish waiver and voluntariness beyond a reasonable doubt.” (Id., at p. 101; see other Court of Appeal opinions in accord with Jackson: People v. Daniels (1969) 1 Cal.App.3d 367, 374 [ 81 Cal.Rptr. 675 ]; People v. Stroud (1969) 273 Cal.App.2d 670, 677-678 [ 78 Cal.Rptr. 270 ].) We do not now express any view as to the nature of the People’s burden of proof of the voluntarines 1976(Lego v. Twomey (1972) 404 U.S. 477 . 486 [ 30 L.Ed.2d 618, 625-626 , 92 S.Ct. 619 ].) It is stated in People v. Jackson (1971) 19 Cal.App.3d 95 [ 96 Cal.Rptr. 414 ], however, that “the burden is on the prosecution to establish waiver and voluntariness beyond a reasonable doubt.” (Id., at p. 101; see other Court of Appeal opinions in accord with Jackson: People v. Daniels (1969) 1 Cal.App.3d 367, 374 [ 81 Cal.Rptr. 675 ]; People v. Stroud (1969) 273 Cal.App.2d 670, 677-678 [ 78 Cal.Rptr. 270 ].) We do not now express any view as to the nature of the People’s burden of proof of the voluntarines | 1 | 1 |
People v. Midkiffgreen2 sentences1971(People v. Gonsalves, 275 Cal.App.2d 724, 727-728 [ 80 Cal.Rptr. 340 ]; People v. Jones, 221 Cal.App.2d 37, 40-41 [ 34 Cal.Rptr. 267 ].) Third, while the burden is on the prosecution to establish waiver and voluntariness beyond a reasonable doubt (People v. Davis, 66 Cal.2d 175, 180-181 [ 57 Cal.Rptr. 130 , 424 P.2d 682 ]), on appeal the determination below will not be set aside unless it is “palpably erroneous.” (People *101 v. Midkiff, 262 Cal.App.2d 734, 739 [ 68 Cal.Rptr. 866 ].) In that regard, it is not the function of the reviewing court to resolve conflicts in the evidence, to reweigh 1971(People v. Gonsalves, 275 Cal.App.2d 724, 727-728 [ 80 Cal.Rptr. 340 ]; People v. Jones, 221 Cal.App.2d 37, 40-41 [ 34 Cal.Rptr. 267 ].) Third, while the burden is on the prosecution to establish waiver and voluntariness beyond a reasonable doubt (People v. Davis, 66 Cal.2d 175, 180-181 [ 57 Cal.Rptr. 130 , 424 P.2d 682 ]), on appeal the determination below will not be set aside unless it is “palpably erroneous.” (People *101 v. Midkiff, 262 Cal.App.2d 734, 739 [ 68 Cal.Rptr. 866 ].) In that regard, it is not the function of the reviewing court to resolve conflicts in the evidence, to reweigh | 1 | 1 |
People v. Sanchezgreen2 sentences1971(People v. Stroud, 273 Cal.App.2d 670, 675 [ 78 Cal.Rptr. 270 ].) True, the appellate court must undertake an independent examination of the uncontradicted evidence to determine whether a confession was voluntarily made (People v. Sanchez, 70 Cal.2d 562, 571-572 [ 75 Cal.Rptr. 642 , 451 P.2d 74 ]), but here the evidence was not uncontradicted. 1971(People v. Stroud, 273 Cal.App.2d 670, 675 [ 78 Cal.Rptr. 270 ].) True, the appellate court must undertake an independent examination of the uncontradicted evidence to determine whether a confession was voluntarily made (People v. Sanchez, 70 Cal.2d 562, 571-572 [ 75 Cal.Rptr. 642 , 451 P.2d 74 ]), but here the evidence was not uncontradicted. | 1 | 1 |
People v. Gonsalvesgreen2 sentences1971(People v. Gonsalves, 275 Cal.App.2d 724, 727-728 [ 80 Cal.Rptr. 340 ]; People v. Jones, 221 Cal.App.2d 37, 40-41 [ 34 Cal.Rptr. 267 ].) Third, while the burden is on the prosecution to establish waiver and voluntariness beyond a reasonable doubt (People v. Davis, 66 Cal.2d 175, 180-181 [ 57 Cal.Rptr. 130 , 424 P.2d 682 ]), on appeal the determination below will not be set aside unless it is “palpably erroneous.” (People *101 v. Midkiff, 262 Cal.App.2d 734, 739 [ 68 Cal.Rptr. 866 ].) In that regard, it is not the function of the reviewing court to resolve conflicts in the evidence, to reweigh 1971(People v. Gonsalves, 275 Cal.App.2d 724, 727-728 [ 80 Cal.Rptr. 340 ]; People v. Jones, 221 Cal.App.2d 37, 40-41 [ 34 Cal.Rptr. 267 ].) Third, while the burden is on the prosecution to establish waiver and voluntariness beyond a reasonable doubt (People v. Davis, 66 Cal.2d 175, 180-181 [ 57 Cal.Rptr. 130 , 424 P.2d 682 ]), on appeal the determination below will not be set aside unless it is “palpably erroneous.” (People *101 v. Midkiff, 262 Cal.App.2d 734, 739 [ 68 Cal.Rptr. 866 ].) In that regard, it is not the function of the reviewing court to resolve conflicts in the evidence, to reweigh | 1 | 1 |
People v. Jonesgreen2 sentences1971(People v. Gonsalves, 275 Cal.App.2d 724, 727-728 [ 80 Cal.Rptr. 340 ]; People v. Jones, 221 Cal.App.2d 37, 40-41 [ 34 Cal.Rptr. 267 ].) Third, while the burden is on the prosecution to establish waiver and voluntariness beyond a reasonable doubt (People v. Davis, 66 Cal.2d 175, 180-181 [ 57 Cal.Rptr. 130 , 424 P.2d 682 ]), on appeal the determination below will not be set aside unless it is “palpably erroneous.” (People *101 v. Midkiff, 262 Cal.App.2d 734, 739 [ 68 Cal.Rptr. 866 ].) In that regard, it is not the function of the reviewing court to resolve conflicts in the evidence, to reweigh 1971(People v. Gonsalves, 275 Cal.App.2d 724, 727-728 [ 80 Cal.Rptr. 340 ]; People v. Jones, 221 Cal.App.2d 37, 40-41 [ 34 Cal.Rptr. 267 ].) Third, while the burden is on the prosecution to establish waiver and voluntariness beyond a reasonable doubt (People v. Davis, 66 Cal.2d 175, 180-181 [ 57 Cal.Rptr. 130 , 424 P.2d 682 ]), on appeal the determination below will not be set aside unless it is “palpably erroneous.” (People *101 v. Midkiff, 262 Cal.App.2d 734, 739 [ 68 Cal.Rptr. 866 ].) In that regard, it is not the function of the reviewing court to resolve conflicts in the evidence, to reweigh | 1 | 1 |
People v. Cartergreen2 sentences1969(People v. Stroud, 273 Cal.App.2d 670, 678 [ 78 Cal.Rptr. 270 ], hearing denied; see People v. Davis, 66 Cal.2d 175, 180-181 [ 57 Cal.Rptr. 130 , 424 P.2d 682 ].) An express finding on the record on those issues need not be made; such findings will be implied from the court’s order admitting the confession into evidence. 2 (People v. Smith, 270 Cal.App.2d 715, 721 [ 76 Cal.Rptr. 53 ]; see People v. Stroud, supra, at p. 679 .) On appeal, the trial judge’s findings on the question of waiver of rights and voluntariness will not be set aside unless they are “palpably erroneous.” (People v. Robinso 1969(People v. Stroud, 273 Cal.App.2d 670, 678 [ 78 Cal.Rptr. 270 ], hearing denied; see People v. Davis, 66 Cal.2d 175, 180-181 [ 57 Cal.Rptr. 130 , 424 P.2d 682 ].) An express finding on the record on those issues need not be made; such findings will be implied from the court’s order admitting the confession into evidence. 2 (People v. Smith, 270 Cal.App.2d 715, 721 [ 76 Cal.Rptr. 53 ]; see People v. Stroud, supra, at p. 679 .) On appeal, the trial judge’s findings on the question of waiver of rights and voluntariness will not be set aside unless they are “palpably erroneous.” (People v. Robinso | 1 | 1 |
People v. Robinsongreen2 sentences1969(People v. Stroud, 273 Cal.App.2d 670, 678 [ 78 Cal.Rptr. 270 ], hearing denied; see People v. Davis, 66 Cal.2d 175, 180-181 [ 57 Cal.Rptr. 130 , 424 P.2d 682 ].) An express finding on the record on those issues need not be made; such findings will be implied from the court’s order admitting the confession into evidence. 2 (People v. Smith, 270 Cal.App.2d 715, 721 [ 76 Cal.Rptr. 53 ]; see People v. Stroud, supra, at p. 679 .) On appeal, the trial judge’s findings on the question of waiver of rights and voluntariness will not be set aside unless they are “palpably erroneous.” (People v. Robinso 1969(People v. Stroud, 273 Cal.App.2d 670, 678 [ 78 Cal.Rptr. 270 ], hearing denied; see People v. Davis, 66 Cal.2d 175, 180-181 [ 57 Cal.Rptr. 130 , 424 P.2d 682 ].) An express finding on the record on those issues need not be made; such findings will be implied from the court’s order admitting the confession into evidence. 2 (People v. Smith, 270 Cal.App.2d 715, 721 [ 76 Cal.Rptr. 53 ]; see People v. Stroud, supra, at p. 679 .) On appeal, the trial judge’s findings on the question of waiver of rights and voluntariness will not be set aside unless they are “palpably erroneous.” (People v. Robinso | 1 | 1 |
People v. Smithgreen2 sentences1969(People v. Stroud, 273 Cal.App.2d 670, 678 [ 78 Cal.Rptr. 270 ], hearing denied; see People v. Davis, 66 Cal.2d 175, 180-181 [ 57 Cal.Rptr. 130 , 424 P.2d 682 ].) An express finding on the record on those issues need not be made; such findings will be implied from the court’s order admitting the confession into evidence. 2 (People v. Smith, 270 Cal.App.2d 715, 721 [ 76 Cal.Rptr. 53 ]; see People v. Stroud, supra, at p. 679 .) On appeal, the trial judge’s findings on the question of waiver of rights and voluntariness will not be set aside unless they are “palpably erroneous.” (People v. Robinso 1969(People v. Stroud, 273 Cal.App.2d 670, 678 [ 78 Cal.Rptr. 270 ], hearing denied; see People v. Davis, 66 Cal.2d 175, 180-181 [ 57 Cal.Rptr. 130 , 424 P.2d 682 ].) An express finding on the record on those issues need not be made; such findings will be implied from the court’s order admitting the confession into evidence. 2 (People v. Smith, 270 Cal.App.2d 715, 721 [ 76 Cal.Rptr. 53 ]; see People v. Stroud, supra, at p. 679 .) On appeal, the trial judge’s findings on the question of waiver of rights and voluntariness will not be set aside unless they are “palpably erroneous.” (People v. Robinso | 1 | 1 |
People v. Piercegreen2 sentences1969(People v. Stroud, 273 Cal.App.2d 670, 678 [ 78 Cal.Rptr. 270 ], hearing denied; see People v. Davis, 66 Cal.2d 175, 180-181 [ 57 Cal.Rptr. 130 , 424 P.2d 682 ].) An express finding on the record on those issues need not be made; such findings will be implied from the court’s order admitting the confession into evidence. 2 (People v. Smith, 270 Cal.App.2d 715, 721 [ 76 Cal.Rptr. 53 ]; see People v. Stroud, supra, at p. 679 .) On appeal, the trial judge’s findings on the question of waiver of rights and voluntariness will not be set aside unless they are “palpably erroneous.” (People v. Robinso 1969(People v. Stroud, 273 Cal.App.2d 670, 678 [ 78 Cal.Rptr. 270 ], hearing denied; see People v. Davis, 66 Cal.2d 175, 180-181 [ 57 Cal.Rptr. 130 , 424 P.2d 682 ].) An express finding on the record on those issues need not be made; such findings will be implied from the court’s order admitting the confession into evidence. 2 (People v. Smith, 270 Cal.App.2d 715, 721 [ 76 Cal.Rptr. 53 ]; see People v. Stroud, supra, at p. 679 .) On appeal, the trial judge’s findings on the question of waiver of rights and voluntariness will not be set aside unless they are “palpably erroneous.” (People v. Robinso | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in California. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Badillo v. Superior Court
green
2 sentences2016(Coolidge v. New Hampshire (1971) 403 U.S. 443, 454-455 ; Badillo v. Superior Court (1956) 46 Cal.2d 269, 272 .) Thus, the burden here fell on the prosecution to establish an exception to the warrant requirement. 2016(Coolidge v. New Hampshire (1971) 403 U.S. 443, 454-455 ; Badillo v. Superior Court (1956) 46 Cal.2d 269, 272 .) Thus, the burden here fell on the prosecution to establish an exception to the warrant requirement. | 2 | 2016–2016 |
Coolidge v. New Hampshire
green
2 sentences2016(Coolidge v. New Hampshire (1971) 403 U.S. 443, 454-455 ; Badillo v. Superior Court (1956) 46 Cal.2d 269, 272 .) Thus, the burden here fell on the prosecution to establish an exception to the warrant requirement. 2016(Coolidge v. New Hampshire (1971) 403 U.S. 443, 454-455 ; Badillo v. Superior Court (1956) 46 Cal.2d 269, 272 .) Thus, the burden here fell on the prosecution to establish an exception to the warrant requirement. | 2 | 2016–2016 |
People v. Pearl
green
1 sentence2023(People v. Willis, supra, 28 Cal.4th at pp. 36-37; People v. Pearl, supra, 172 Cal.App.4th at pp. 1292-1293.) It did not do so. | 1 | 2023–2023 |
People v. Willis
green
2 sentences2023(People v. Willis, supra, 28 Cal.4th at pp. 36-37; People v. Pearl, supra, 172 Cal.App.4th at pp. 1292-1293.) It did not do so. 2023(Id. at pp. 1292-1293; People v. Willis (2002) 28 Cal.4th 22, 36-37 .) In Herring, the United States Supreme Court addressed the applicability of the good faith exception where police officers arrested the defendant based on information from a computer database showing an outstanding arrest warrant. | 1 | 2023–2023 |
People v. Jackson
green
2 sentences1976(Lego v. Twomey (1972) 404 U.S. 477 . 486 [ 30 L.Ed.2d 618, 625-626 , 92 S.Ct. 619 ].) It is stated in People v. Jackson (1971) 19 Cal.App.3d 95 [ 96 Cal.Rptr. 414 ], however, that “the burden is on the prosecution to establish waiver and voluntariness beyond a reasonable doubt.” (Id., at p. 101; see other Court of Appeal opinions in accord with Jackson: People v. Daniels (1969) 1 Cal.App.3d 367, 374 [ 81 Cal.Rptr. 675 ]; People v. Stroud (1969) 273 Cal.App.2d 670, 677-678 [ 78 Cal.Rptr. 270 ].) We do not now express any view as to the nature of the People’s burden of proof of the voluntarines 1976(Lego v. Twomey (1972) 404 U.S. 477 . 486 [ 30 L.Ed.2d 618, 625-626 , 92 S.Ct. 619 ].) It is stated in People v. Jackson (1971) 19 Cal.App.3d 95 [ 96 Cal.Rptr. 414 ], however, that “the burden is on the prosecution to establish waiver and voluntariness beyond a reasonable doubt.” (Id., at p. 101; see other Court of Appeal opinions in accord with Jackson: People v. Daniels (1969) 1 Cal.App.3d 367, 374 [ 81 Cal.Rptr. 675 ]; People v. Stroud (1969) 273 Cal.App.2d 670, 677-678 [ 78 Cal.Rptr. 270 ].) We do not now express any view as to the nature of the People’s burden of proof of the voluntarines | 1 | 1976–1976 |
Lego v. Twomey
green
2 sentences1976(Lego v. Twomey (1972) 404 U.S. 477 . 486 [ 30 L.Ed.2d 618, 625-626 , 92 S.Ct. 619 ].) It is stated in People v. Jackson (1971) 19 Cal.App.3d 95 [ 96 Cal.Rptr. 414 ], however, that “the burden is on the prosecution to establish waiver and voluntariness beyond a reasonable doubt.” (Id., at p. 101; see other Court of Appeal opinions in accord with Jackson: People v. Daniels (1969) 1 Cal.App.3d 367, 374 [ 81 Cal.Rptr. 675 ]; People v. Stroud (1969) 273 Cal.App.2d 670, 677-678 [ 78 Cal.Rptr. 270 ].) We do not now express any view as to the nature of the People’s burden of proof of the voluntarines 1976(Lego v. Twomey (1972) 404 U.S. 477 . 486 [ 30 L.Ed.2d 618, 625-626 , 92 S.Ct. 619 ].) It is stated in People v. Jackson (1971) 19 Cal.App.3d 95 [ 96 Cal.Rptr. 414 ], however, that “the burden is on the prosecution to establish waiver and voluntariness beyond a reasonable doubt.” (Id., at p. 101; see other Court of Appeal opinions in accord with Jackson: People v. Daniels (1969) 1 Cal.App.3d 367, 374 [ 81 Cal.Rptr. 675 ]; People v. Stroud (1969) 273 Cal.App.2d 670, 677-678 [ 78 Cal.Rptr. 270 ].) We do not now express any view as to the nature of the People’s burden of proof of the voluntarines | 1 | 1976–1976 |
Pinto v. Pierce
green
2 sentences1969(Pinto v. Pierce, 389 U.S. 31 [ 19 L.Ed.2d 31 , 88 S.Ct. 192 ].) The burden is on the prosecution to establish waiver and voluntariness by proof beyond a reasonable doubt. 1969(Pinto v. Pierce, 389 U.S. 31 [ 19 L.Ed.2d 31 , 88 S.Ct. 192 ].) The burden is on the prosecution to establish waiver and voluntariness by proof beyond a reasonable doubt. | 1 | 1969–1969 |