Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
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.
The People of the State of California v. Superior Court (Romero), 13 CAL. 4TH 497, 917 P.2D 628 (Cal. 1996), was a landmark case in the state of California that gave California Superior Court judges the ability to dismiss a criminal defendant's "strike prior" pursuant to the California Three-strikes law, thereby avoiding a 25-to-life minimum sentence.
The California Supreme Court reversed Berry's murder conviction, while affirming Berry's conviction for assault using deadly force. The case has also been discussed or mentioned in more than forty separate academic journal articles relating to murder , female victims of domestic violence , and rape . [ 2 ]
On appeal, the Court of Appeal of California (First District, Fourth Division) reversed the defendant's conviction and ordered a new trial. The Government's petition for hearing by the California Supreme Court was denied on July 29, 1970. Following two subsequent mistrials, the District Attorney declined to pursue a fourth trial, thus ...
Among the laws Friday's decision could affect are California's bans on assault-style weapons and large-capacity ammunition magazines, both of which are facing legal challenges in the U.S. 9th ...
A California prison guard who attacked a 65-year-old inmate who later died — and then tried to get his colleagues to cover up his actions — apologized in court Monday, and then was sentenced ...
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.