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.
5 California opinions name it 1 courts 1980–2022 4 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 |
|---|---|---|
| No positive-treatment citations attached to this issue in California. | ||
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in California. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
People v. Avalos
green
2 sentences2022(People v. Avalos (1984) 37 Cal.3d 216, 233 .) After an examination of the record, we cannot determine whether the improperly considered factors were determinative in the trial court’s selection of the upper term sentence in this case and conclude that the matter must be remanded for resentencing. 2022(People v. Avalos (1984) 37 Cal.3d 216, 233 .) After an examination of the record, we cannot determine whether the improperly considered factors were determinative in the trial court’s selection of the upper term sentence in this case, and conclude that the matter must be remanded for resentencing. | 3 | 2022–2022 |
People v. Jefferson
green
1 sentence2022(People v. Gutierrez (2014) 58 Cal.4th 1354, 1391 .) This is true because “remand is not appropriate when it would be an idle act.” (People v. Jefferson (2019) 38 Cal.App.5th 399, 409 .) Here, the two properly considered factors largely subsumed the improperly considered factors. | 1 | 2022–2022 |
People v. Gutierrez
green
1 sentence2022(People v. Gutierrez (2014) 58 Cal.4th 1354, 1391 .) This is true because “remand is not appropriate when it would be an idle act.” (People v. Jefferson (2019) 38 Cal.App.5th 399, 409 .) Here, the two properly considered factors largely subsumed the improperly considered factors. | 1 | 2022–2022 |
People v. Cheatham
green
2 sentences1980People v. Cheatham (1979) 23 Cal.3d 829 [ 153 Cal.Rptr. 585 , 591 P.2d 1237 ] holds contrary to appellant’s contention. 1980People v. Cheatham (1979) 23 Cal.3d 829 [ 153 Cal.Rptr. 585 , 591 P.2d 1237 ] holds contrary to appellant’s contention. | 1 | 1980–1980 |
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.
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.