Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
For example, California "stop and identify" law, Penal Code §647(e) had wording [37] [38] [39] similar to the Nevada law upheld in Hiibel, but a California appellate court, in People v. Solomon (1973), 33 Cal.App.3d 429 construed the law to require "credible and reliable" identification that carries a "reasonable assurance" of its authenticity.
Disorderly conduct is a crime in most jurisdictions, such as the United States and China.Typically, "disorderly conduct" is a term used to refer to any behavior that is considered unacceptable in a formal, civilized or controlled environment.
The Judicial Council of California is the rule-making arm of the California court system. [1] In accordance with the California Constitution and under the leadership of the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of California, the council is responsible for "ensuring the consistent, independent, impartial, and accessible administration of justice."
Cohen v. California, 403 U.S. 15 (1971), was a landmark decision of the US Supreme Court holding that the First Amendment prevented the conviction of Paul Robert Cohen for the crime of disturbing the peace by wearing a jacket displaying "Fuck the Draft" in the public corridors of a California courthouse.
In 1941, the Puerto Rican Legislative Assembly joined the nationwide movement towards transferring civil procedure and evidentiary law into a system of rules promulgated by the courts, then abolished the judicial power to promulgate rules in 1946, then reinstated it in 1952 (subject to the right of the legislature to amend court rules before ...
The author, Paul Mason (1898–1985), was a scholar who worked for the California State Senate. He is best known for writing Constitutional History of California in 1951 and Manual of Legislative Procedure in 1935. The National Conference of State Legislatures (NCSL) was assigned copyright ownership by Mason prior to his death.
Dicta from the California Supreme Court is entitled to great weight, and the Court of Appeal rarely exercises its power to disregard the high court's gratuitous statements about California law. [10] Cases from other states are often cited in California appellate opinions, particularly when the out-of-state decisions disagree with one another. [11]
Faretta v. California, 422 U.S. 806 (1975), was a case in which the Supreme Court of the United States held that criminal defendants have a constitutional right to refuse counsel and represent themselves in state criminal proceedings.