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 1972–2021 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.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
People v. Pellegrinogreen2 sentences2015The fact that *758 the Legislature has decreed no statute of limitations for murder shows the importance that society places on governmental efforts to bring a murderer to the bar of justice.” (Penney v. Superior Court, supra, 28 Cal.App.3d at p. 954 .) “[T]he delay may be unreasonable if the prosecution delayed in filing charges when all the evidence was discovered years earlier” (People v. Hartman (1985) 170 Cal.App.3d 572, 581 [ 216 Cal.Rptr. 641 ]), or where “the reason for the delay was not investigative needs but the lack of interest of the responsible agencies in prosecuting the defenda 2015The fact that *758 the Legislature has decreed no statute of limitations for murder shows the importance that society places on governmental efforts to bring a murderer to the bar of justice.” (Penney v. Superior Court, supra, 28 Cal.App.3d at p. 954 .) “[T]he delay may be unreasonable if the prosecution delayed in filing charges when all the evidence was discovered years earlier” (People v. Hartman (1985) 170 Cal.App.3d 572, 581 [ 216 Cal.Rptr. 641 ]), or where “the reason for the delay was not investigative needs but the lack of interest of the responsible agencies in prosecuting the defenda | 1 | 1 |
People v. Hartmangreen2 sentences2015The fact that *758 the Legislature has decreed no statute of limitations for murder shows the importance that society places on governmental efforts to bring a murderer to the bar of justice.” (Penney v. Superior Court, supra, 28 Cal.App.3d at p. 954 .) “[T]he delay may be unreasonable if the prosecution delayed in filing charges when all the evidence was discovered years earlier” (People v. Hartman (1985) 170 Cal.App.3d 572, 581 [ 216 Cal.Rptr. 641 ]), or where “the reason for the delay was not investigative needs but the lack of interest of the responsible agencies in prosecuting the defenda 2015The fact that *758 the Legislature has decreed no statute of limitations for murder shows the importance that society places on governmental efforts to bring a murderer to the bar of justice.” (Penney v. Superior Court, supra, 28 Cal.App.3d at p. 954 .) “[T]he delay may be unreasonable if the prosecution delayed in filing charges when all the evidence was discovered years earlier” (People v. Hartman (1985) 170 Cal.App.3d 572, 581 [ 216 Cal.Rptr. 641 ]), or where “the reason for the delay was not investigative needs but the lack of interest of the responsible agencies in prosecuting the defenda | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in California. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Penney v. Superior Court
green
2 sentences2021In the weighing process, “the seriousness of the crime for which the indictment is returned must be given appropriate consideration. 37 The fact that the Legislature has decreed no statute of limitations for murder shows the importance that society places on governmental efforts to bring a murderer to the bar of justice.” (Penney v. Superior Court (1972) 28 Cal.App.3d 941, 954 .) Further, “whether the delay was negligent or purposeful is relevant to the balancing process. 2021In the weighing process, “the seriousness of the crime for which the indictment is returned must be given appropriate consideration. 37 The fact that the Legislature has decreed no statute of limitations for murder shows the importance that society places on governmental efforts to bring a murderer to the bar of justice.” (Penney v. Superior Court (1972) 28 Cal.App.3d 941, 954 .) Further, “whether the delay was negligent or purposeful is relevant to the balancing process. | 3 | 2015–2021 |
Barker v. Wingo
green
2 sentences1978As recently stated by the United States Supreme Court in Barker v. Wingo, 407 U.S. 514 at page 522 [ 33 L.Ed.2d 101 at p. 112 , 92 S.Ct. 2182 ]: ‘The amorphous quality of the right [to speedy trial] also leads to the unsatisfactorily severe remedy of dismissal of the indictment when the right has been deprived. 1978As recently stated by the United States Supreme Court in Barker v. Wingo, 407 U.S. 514 at page 522 [ 33 L.Ed.2d 101 at p. 112 , 92 S.Ct. 2182 ]: ‘The amorphous quality of the right [to speedy trial] also leads to the unsatisfactorily severe remedy of dismissal of the indictment when the right has been deprived. | 2 | 1972–1978 |
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.