Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
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.
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.
Brown v. Entertainment Merchants Association, 564 U.S. 786 (2011), was a landmark decision of the US Supreme Court that struck down a 2005 California law banning the sale of certain violent video games to children without parental supervision.
Defendant convicted in Los Angeles County Superior Court; conviction affirmed by California Court of Appeal; California Supreme Court declined review, and the U.S. Supreme Court granted certiorari, 535 U.S. 969 (2002). Holding; California's three strikes law does not violate the Eighth Amendment prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment.
The California Supreme Court ruling curtails the ability of public employees in the state to seek help from the courts in labor disputes.
The Supreme Court is expected to decide the case, Diamond Alternative Energy v. EPA, by summer. This article originally appeared on USA TODAY: Supreme Court to hear challenge to CA's move to phase ...
The Supreme Court of California is the highest judicial body in the state and sits at the apex of the judiciary of California. [1] Its membership consists of the Chief Justice of California and six associate justices who are nominated by the Governor of California and appointed after confirmation by the California Commission on Judicial Appointments. [2]
The ruling by the California Supreme Court is a major victory for the ride-hailing industry, which has said that many companies would end or limit service in the state if they were forced to treat ...