Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
The act provides immunity to the State of California and its related entities from being sued. The law immunizes public employees from liability for “instituting or prosecuting any judicial or administrative proceeding” within the scope of their employment, “even if” the employees act “maliciously and without probable cause.” (Cal. Gov. Code, § 821.6)
California criminal law generally follows the law of the United States. However, there are both substantive and procedural differences between how the United States federal government and California prosecute alleged violations of criminal law.
Nolle prosequi, [a] abbreviated nol or nolle pros, is legal Latin meaning "to be unwilling to pursue". [3] [4] It is a type of prosecutorial discretion in common law, used for prosecutors' declarations that they are voluntarily ending a criminal case before trial or before a verdict is rendered; [5] it is a kind of motion to dismiss and contrasts with an involuntary dismissal.
In the United States federal system, the prosecutor has wide latitude in determining when, who, how, and even whether to prosecute for apparent violations of federal criminal law. The prosecutor's broad discretion in such areas as initiating or forgoing prosecutions, selecting or recommending specific charges, and terminating prosecutions by ...
In California, criminal defendants have the right to appeal both felony [29] and misdemeanor [30] convictions. If the defendant is convicted of a misdemeanor, they have the right to be released on bail pending the outcome of their appeal. Misdemeanor appeals are heard by the Appellate Division of the California Superior Court.
In May 1979, prosecutor Mark L. Webb, Northern District of California, conducted RICO trial, United States v. Sam Bailey Gang. The successful prosecution used the RICO statute to allege that a gang of postal burglars and a Nevada fence collaborated criminally in an organized crime fashion. The case did not involve a Mafia crime family.
In the Family Court of Western Australia, an online form exists to commence such proceedings which can be downloaded, completed and filed. [1]In the Supreme Court of Western Australia, [2] either an originating summons (Form No.75 as is an ex-parte application) or originating motion (Form No.64) must be filed specifying the alleged contempt, and personally served on the alleged contemptor ...
Department of Homeland Security v. Regents of the University of California, 591 U.S. 1 (2020), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held by a 5–4 vote that a 2017 U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) order to rescind the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) immigration program was "arbitrary and capricious" under the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) and ...