Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
On November 7, 1972, the proposition overwhelmingly passed and consequently resulted in explicit references to privacy in the California State Constitution. [2] Subsequently, Supreme Court of California decisions have used this enumerated right to grant additional rights beyond those of the California Constitution.
The U.S. Constitution takes priority over the California constitution so courts may still be obliged to exclude evidence under the federal Bill of Rights. In practice the law prevented the California courts from interpreting the state constitution so as to impose an exclusionary rule more strict than that required by the federal constitution. [3]
California has a powerful tradition of popular sovereignty, which is reflected in the frequent use of initiatives to amend the state constitution, as well as the former state constitutional requirement [18] (repealed in 1966 and enacted as Government Code Section 100) that all government process shall be styled in the name of "the People of the ...
In turn, it was the California Practice Act that served as the foundation of the California Code of Civil Procedure. New York never enacted Field's proposed civil or political codes, and belatedly enacted his proposed penal and criminal procedure codes only after California, but they were the basis of the codes enacted by California in 1872. [11]
The Constitution of California is among the longest in the world. [4] This is predominantly due to additions by California ballot propositions, which allow enacting amendments by a simple majority vote in a referendum. Since its enactment, the California constitution has been amended an average of five times each year. [5]
Trespass is an area of tort law broadly divided into three groups: trespass to the person (see below), trespass to chattels, and trespass to land. Trespass to the person historically involved six separate trespasses: threats, assault, battery, wounding, mayhem (or maiming), and false imprisonment. [ 1 ]
Pruneyard Shopping Center v. Robins, 447 U.S. 74 (1980), was a U.S. Supreme Court decision issued on June 9, 1980 which affirmed the decision of the California Supreme Court in a case that arose out of a free speech dispute between the Pruneyard Shopping Center in Campbell, California, and several local high school students (who wished to canvass signatures for a petition against United ...
California Senate Bill 202, passed in 2011, mandated that initiatives and optional referendums can appear only on the November general election ballot, a statute that was controversial at the time, being seen as a self-serving, single-party initiative; [3] the November general election rule for initiatives and optional referendums has ...