Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
A fault divorce is a divorce which is granted after the party asking for the divorce sufficiently proves that the other party did something wrong that justifies ending the marriage. [8] For example, in Texas, grounds for an "at-fault" divorce include cruelty, adultery, a felony conviction, abandonment, living apart, and commitment in a mental ...
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.
California, 538 U.S. 11 (2003 ... in part based on Ewing's extensive criminal history: [7] ... the Court upheld a life sentence for obtaining $120.75 by false ...
United States v. Shipp is the only criminal trial of the Supreme Court in its entire history. It is considered an important decision in that it affirmed the right of the US Supreme Court to intervene in state criminal cases. Shipp and several of his co-defendants were convicted and sentenced to terms from 2–3 months in federal prison. [25]
Roldan v. Los Angeles County, 129 Cal. App. 267, 18 P.2d 706, was a 1933 court case in California confirming that the state's anti-miscegenation laws at the time did not bar the marriage of a Filipino and a white person. [1]
California, 549 U.S. 270 (2007), is a decision by the Supreme Court of the United States in which the Court held, 6–3, that the sentencing standard set forward in Apprendi v. New Jersey (2000) applies to California's determinate sentencing law. In California, a judge may choose one of three sentences for a crime—a low, middle, or high term.
California saw more than 300,000 violent crimes per year throughout the 1990s, compared to more than 190,000 in 2022, according to the state Department of Justice’s Crime in California report.
Lambert v. California, 355 U.S. 225 (1957), was a United States Supreme Court case regarding the defense of ignorance of the law when there is no legal notice. [1] The court held that when one is required to register one's presence, failure to register may be punished only when there is a probability that the accused party had knowledge of the law before committing the crime of failing to ...