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 2 courts 2014–2018 0 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. M.V.green2 sentences2018If the child is not detained, the hearing on the joint assessment must *1056 occur before the jurisdictional hearing and within 30 days of the date of the petition.' (Rule 5.512 (e).)" ( M.V. , supra , 225 Cal.App.4th at p. 1507 , 171 Cal.Rptr.3d 519 .) As we noted in M.V. , however: "[A]t least one commentator has indicated that the timeframes set forth in rule 5.512(e) may be contrary to the best interests of the minor and the protection of society and therefore void as inconsistent with the intent of section 241.1. 2018If the child is not detained, the hearing on the joint assessment must *1056 occur before the jurisdictional hearing and within 30 days of the date of the petition.' (Rule 5.512 (e).)" ( M.V. , supra , 225 Cal.App.4th at p. 1507 , 171 Cal.Rptr.3d 519 .) As we noted in M.V. , however: "[A]t least one commentator has indicated that the timeframes set forth in rule 5.512(e) may be contrary to the best interests of the minor and the protection of society and therefore void as inconsistent with the intent of section 241.1. | 2 | 4 |
California Court Reporters Ass'n v. Judicial Councilgreen2 sentences2018(See Seiser & Kumli, Cal. Juvenile Courts Practice and Procedure (2013 ed.) § 3.27[2], p. 3-52, citing California Court Reporters Assn. v. Judicial Council of California (1995) 39 Cal.App.4th 15 , 24-26 [ 46 Cal.Rptr.2d 44 ].) This is because a decision to terminate one status should not be made until after a determination that the jurisdictional allegations supporting the alternate status are true. ( Id. at p. 3-51.) As is pertinent to the present matter, '[s]ince the full nature of the delinquency allegations may not become clear until after they have been litigated and the juvenile court ma 2018(See Seiser & Kumli, Cal. Juvenile Courts Practice and Procedure (2013 ed.) § 3.27[2], p. 3-52, citing California Court Reporters Assn. v. Judicial Council of California (1995) 39 Cal.App.4th 15 , 24-26 [ 46 Cal.Rptr.2d 44 ].) This is because a decision to terminate one status should not be made until after a determination that the jurisdictional allegations supporting the alternate status are true. ( Id. at p. 3-51.) As is pertinent to the present matter, '[s]ince the full nature of the delinquency allegations may not become clear until after they have been litigated and the juvenile court ma | 1 | 5 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in California. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Shaw v. County of Santa Cruz
green
1 sentence2014(See Seiser & Kumli, Cal. Juvenile Courts Practice and Procedure (2013) § 3.27[2], p. 3-52 [citing California Court Reporters Assn. v. Judicial Council of California (1995) 39 Cal.App.4th 15 , 24–26, 46 Cal.Rptr.2d 44 ].) This is because a decision to terminate one status should not be made until after a determination that the jurisdictional allegations supporting the alternate status are true. [Citation.] As is pertinent to the present matter, ‘[s]ince the full nature of the delinquency allegations may not become clear until after they have been litigated and the juvenile court may or may not | 1 | 2014–2014 |
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.