Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Within the federal court system, Rule 18 of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure specifies which federal court may hear a particular criminal case: Unless a statute or these rules permit otherwise, the government must prosecute an offense in a district where the offense was committed.
The Supreme Court of the United States vacated the judgment of the California District Court of Appeal. In an opinion by Justice Douglas, expressing the view of six members of the Court, it was held that the denial of counsel under the California rule of procedure stated above violated the Fourteenth Amendment.
One of the more controversial sections of the California Penal Code are the consecutive Sections 666 and 667; Section 666, known officially as petty theft with a prior – and colloquially, felony petty theft and makes it possible for someone who committed a minor shoplifting crime to be charged with a felony if the person had been convicted of ...
California recognizes three categories of crime, distinguishable by the gravity of offense and severity of punishment: Felonies, Misdemeanors, and Infractions. [2] Regardless of category or specific offense, all valid crimes are required to have two elements: 1) an act committed or omitted In California, and 2) an articulated punishment as ...
A California man drugged and raped nine women, including one who died from an overdose, authorities said.. Michel DiGiorgio, 50, now faces one count of murder, three counts of rape by use of drugs ...
A man accused of igniting California’s fourth-largest blaze in its history, the Park Fire, pleaded not guilty Thursday during his arraignment on a charge of arson as prosecutors allege he lit a ...
A central California man suspected of sexually assaulting a juvenile and slashing the child's throat in the laundry room of an apartment complex earlier this month has been arrested, police ...
Lockyer v. Andrade, 538 U.S. 63 (2003), [1] decided the same day as Ewing v. California (a case with a similar subject matter), [2] held that there would be no relief by means of a petition for a writ of habeas corpus from a sentence imposed under California's three strikes law as a violation of the Eighth Amendment's prohibition of cruel and unusual punishments.