Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
So the California courts allow a defendant represented by court-appointed counsel to directly communicate with the trial judge in the context of a Marsden motion, and only in such a context. A Marsden motion is a formal request made by a criminal defendant to the court. The court hears arguments on the motion from the defendant and the attorney ...
The California Style Manual was first published in 1942 by Bernard E. Witkin, who was the California Reporter of Decisions from 1940 to 1949. Originally intended primarily for court staff and the Reporter of Decisions themselves, the Manual soon became popular amongst attorneys. The second edition was written by William Nankervis in 1961, who ...
A motion or application for leave is a motion filed with the court seeking permission to deviate from an established rule or procedure of the court. [ 1 ] The most common use of a motion for leave is to seek an extension to an already-passed time frame to amend a court pleading , which is allowed once under the Federal Rules of Criminal ...
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.
A discharge is a type of sentence imposed by a court whereby no punishment is imposed.. An absolute discharge is an unconditional discharge whereby the court finds that a crime has technically been committed but that any punishment of the defendant would be inappropriate and the case is closed.
In a civil proceeding or criminal prosecution under the common law or under statute, a defendant may raise a defense (or defence) [a] in an effort to avert civil liability or criminal conviction.
California Atty. Gen. Rob Bonta said he and his staff have been reviewing former President Trump's second-term agenda in detail to prepare a potential onslaught of environmental, immigration and ...
Robinson v. California, 370 U.S. 660 (1962), is the first landmark decision of the United States Supreme Court in which the Eighth Amendment of the Constitution was interpreted to prohibit criminalization of particular acts or conduct, as contrasted with prohibiting the use of a particular form of punishment for a crime.