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 1968–2024 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. Espinozagreen2 sentences2004(See People v. Espinoza (1992) 3 Cal.4th 806, 820 [ 12 Cal.Rptr.2d 682 , 838 P.2d 204 ] (Espinoza); Donnelly v. DeChristophoro (1974) 416 U.S. 637, 642-643 [ 40 L.Ed.2d 431 , 94 S.Ct. 1868 ] (DeChristophoro).) Defense counsel also voiced exception after the prosecutor at one point made a speaking objection in which he asserted that a question posed by defense counsel to Terry Guillory—asking whether Guillory recalled telling the prosecutor of “talk on the street” that Maurice Solvang and Donna Guthrie “were involved in this”—was “the most outrageous question I have ever heard” and that “[defen 2004(See People v. Espinoza (1992) 3 Cal.4th 806, 820 [ 12 Cal.Rptr.2d 682 , 838 P.2d 204 ] (Espinoza); Donnelly v. DeChristophoro (1974) 416 U.S. 637, 642-643 [ 40 L.Ed.2d 431 , 94 S.Ct. 1868 ] (DeChristophoro).) Defense counsel also voiced exception after the prosecutor at one point made a speaking objection in which he asserted that a question posed by defense counsel to Terry Guillory—asking whether Guillory recalled telling the prosecutor of “talk on the street” that Maurice Solvang and Donna Guthrie “were involved in this”—was “the most outrageous question I have ever heard” and that “[defen | 1 | 1 |
Donnelly v. DeChristoforogreen2 sentences2004(See People v. Espinoza (1992) 3 Cal.4th 806, 820 [ 12 Cal.Rptr.2d 682 , 838 P.2d 204 ] (Espinoza); Donnelly v. DeChristophoro (1974) 416 U.S. 637, 642-643 [ 40 L.Ed.2d 431 , 94 S.Ct. 1868 ] (DeChristophoro).) Defense counsel also voiced exception after the prosecutor at one point made a speaking objection in which he asserted that a question posed by defense counsel to Terry Guillory—asking whether Guillory recalled telling the prosecutor of “talk on the street” that Maurice Solvang and Donna Guthrie “were involved in this”—was “the most outrageous question I have ever heard” and that “[defen 2004(See People v. Espinoza (1992) 3 Cal.4th 806, 820 [ 12 Cal.Rptr.2d 682 , 838 P.2d 204 ] (Espinoza); Donnelly v. DeChristophoro (1974) 416 U.S. 637, 642-643 [ 40 L.Ed.2d 431 , 94 S.Ct. 1868 ] (DeChristophoro).) Defense counsel also voiced exception after the prosecutor at one point made a speaking objection in which he asserted that a question posed by defense counsel to Terry Guillory—asking whether Guillory recalled telling the prosecutor of “talk on the street” that Maurice Solvang and Donna Guthrie “were involved in this”—was “the most outrageous question I have ever heard” and that “[defen | 1 | 1 |
People v. McDanielgreen2 sentences1999(E.g., People v. McDaniel (1943) 59 Cal.App.2d 672, 677 [ 140 P.2d 88 ].) Defendant further observes that Bunnell’s initial comments regarding the welder were volunteered and nonresponsive to the question posed by defense counsel. 1999(E.g., People v. McDaniel (1943) 59 Cal.App.2d 672, 677 [ 140 P.2d 88 ].) Defendant further observes that Bunnell’s initial comments regarding the welder were volunteered and nonresponsive to the question posed by defense counsel. | 1 | 1 |
People v. Watsongreen2 sentences1982The court was correct, but even were it admissible there would be no need to reverse, for such exclusion was harmless. ( People v. Watson (1956) 46 Cal.2d 818, 836 [ 299 P.2d 243 ].) Defendant contends there was prosecutorial misconduct. 1982The court was correct, but even were it admissible there would be no need to reverse, for such exclusion was harmless. ( People v. Watson (1956) 46 Cal.2d 818, 836 [ 299 P.2d 243 ].) Defendant contends there was prosecutorial misconduct. | 1 | 1 |
Barsky v. United Statesgreen1 sentence1968The question posed by the clause lettered (b) was touched upon in Barsky v. United States, 167 F.2d 241, 249-350 [ 83 App.D.C. 127 ], cert. den. 334 U.S. 843 [ 92 L.Ed. 1767 , 68 S.Ct. 1511 ], where it was observed: “It is urged by the appellee Government that freedom of speech does not encompass freedom to remain silent. | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in California. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Harrington v. Richter
green
1 sentence2024Moreover, it is significant that defendant pins his claim of ineffective assistance on a single question posed by defense counsel. “[W]hile in some instances ‘even an isolated error’ can support an ineffective-assistance claim if it is ‘sufficiently egregious and prejudicial,’ [citation], it is difficult to establish ineffective assistance when counsel’s overall performance indicates active and capable advocacy.” (See Harrington v. Richter, supra, 562 U.S. at p. 111 .) We have reviewed the record and find defense counsel’s overall performance to be engaged and competent, in addition to conclud | 1 | 2024–2024 |
People v. Walls
green
1 sentence1980Both courts concluded that if there was any doubt as to whether all of the elements of the offense had been committed, particularly whether penetration occurred, “‘defendant’s counsel should have pursued that question further.’” (People v. Walls, supra, 85 Cal.App.3d at p. 455 .) In the instant case, the only question posed by defense counsel concerning this offense was the following, “And did the sodomy occur there also on the mound?” If defense counsel believed, as is now asserted, that she might have confused sodomy with rear-entry intercourse, that should have been explored with the witnes | 1 | 1980–1980 |
Estate of Nathan v. Commissioner
green
1 sentence1968The question posed by the clause lettered (b) was touched upon in Barsky v. United States, 167 F.2d 241, 249-350 [ 83 App.D.C. 127 ], cert. den. 334 U.S. 843 [ 92 L.Ed. 1767 , 68 S.Ct. 1511 ], where it was observed: “It is urged by the appellee Government that freedom of speech does not encompass freedom to remain silent. | 1 | 1968–1968 |
Kentucky v. Illinois Central Railroad
green
1 sentence1968The question posed by the clause lettered (b) was touched upon in Barsky v. United States, 167 F.2d 241, 249-350 [ 83 App.D.C. 127 ], cert. den. 334 U.S. 843 [ 92 L.Ed. 1767 , 68 S.Ct. 1511 ], where it was observed: “It is urged by the appellee Government that freedom of speech does not encompass freedom to remain silent. | 1 | 1968–1968 |
Barsky v. United States
green
1 sentence1968The question posed by the clause lettered (b) was touched upon in Barsky v. United States, 167 F.2d 241, 249-350 [ 83 App.D.C. 127 ], cert. den. 334 U.S. 843 [ 92 L.Ed. 1767 , 68 S.Ct. 1511 ], where it was observed: “It is urged by the appellee Government that freedom of speech does not encompass freedom to remain silent. | 1 | 1968–1968 |
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.