For reprint rights or to purchase a copy of your Daily Journal photo, email jeremy@reprintpros.com for prices or call 949-702-5390.

To buy more copies, call 866-531-1492 or email subscribe@dailyjournal.com
This is the property of the Daily Journal Corporation and fully protected by copyright. It is made available only to Daily Journal subscribers for personal or collaborative purposes and may not be distributed, reproduced, modified, stored or transferred without written permission. Please click "Reprint" to order presentation-ready copies to distribute to clients or use in commercial marketing materials or for permission to post on a website. and copyright (showing year of publication) at the bottom.
Subscribe to the Daily Journal for access to Daily Appellate Reports, Verdicts, Judicial Profiles and more...
Daily appellate reports
Sign up for Daily Journal emails
    Filter by date
     to 
    Search by Case Name
    Search by Judge
    Search by Case Number
    Search by DJ Citation Number
    Search by Category
    Search by Court
Name Category Published
People v. Marquez
Nothing in Marsy's Law restricts the Legislature from creating new postconviction procedures, such as Penal Code Section 1170.95. 		statutory_interpretation 4DCA/3 Oct. 21, 2020
Modification: People v. Love
Defendants convicted of attempted murder on a natural and probable consequences theory are excluded from relief under Senate Bill 1437. 		statutory_interpretation 2DCA/2 Oct. 19, 2020
People v. Montelongo
Two statutes that criminalize the same conduct but impose different penalties are not unconstitutionally vague. 		statutory_interpretation 2DCA/7 Oct. 19, 2020
People v. Valliant
Resentencing relief under Penal Code Section 1170.91 subdivision (b)(1)(B), only applies to military veterans sentenced before January 1, 2015. 		statutory_interpretation 4DCA/3 Oct. 16, 2020
Fipke v. California Horse Racing Bd.
Business and Professions Code Section 19500 prohibits stewards from awarding double jockey fee to rider who is removed from mount prior to 'scratch time.' 		statutory_interpretation 2DCA/8 Oct. 7, 2020
U.S. v. Pacheco
Deportation is 'pending' for purposes of 18 U.S.C. Section 2246(5)(A) when victims are in unresolved deportation or removal proceedings; thus, defendant's convictions for sexually abusing noncitizen minors were affirmed. 		statutory_interpretation 9th Oct. 7, 2020
U.S. v. Sterling Centrecorp
Operator liability under CERCLA requires the actual participation in decisions related to pollution. 		statutory_interpretation 9th Oct. 6, 2020
People v. Betts
Penal Code Section 667.61(j)(2)'s One Strike law's sentencing provisions applied to convictions for lewd acts on a child under age 14. 		statutory_interpretation 2DCA/6 Oct. 5, 2020
People v. Love
Defendants convicted of attempted murder on a natural and probable consequences theory are excluded from relief under Senate Bill 1437. 		statutory_interpretation 1DCA/2 Oct. 5, 2020
People v. Bentley
Appellant was not eligible for resentencing under Penal Code Section 1170.95 because he was not convicted of felony murder or murder pursuant to a natural and probable consequences theory. 		statutory_interpretation 2DCA/6 Sep. 30, 2020
Miller v. C.H. Robinson Worldwide
Plaintiff's negligence claim against freight broker fell within Federal Aviation Administration Authorization Act's exception to preemption for 'the safety regulatory authority of a State with respect to motor vehicles.' 		statutory_interpretation 9th Sep. 29, 2020
People v. Oliver
Lack of victim's consent is not an element or affirmative defense of human trafficking an adult in violation of Penal Code Section 236.1(b). 		statutory_interpretation 4DCA/2 Sep. 24, 2020
Modification: People v. Martinez
Where trial court revokes supervision and Legislature enacts ameliorative statute prior to or during pendency of appeal from revocation order, defendant is entitled to seek relief under new law. 		statutory_interpretation 2DCA/6 Sep. 24, 2020
People v. Perez
Trial court can consider preliminary hearing testimony in determining as part of its second prima facie review under Penal Code Section 1170.95(c), whether petitioner has made showing he is entitled to relief. 		statutory_interpretation 2DCA/7 Sep. 23, 2020
People v. D.C.
Although defendant's possession of controlled substance conviction was set aside after he pled no contest and completed treatment, it still existed for purposes of sealing his arrest records. 		statutory_interpretation 5DCA Sep. 18, 2020
Mayron v. Google LLC
Automatic renewal law under Business and Professions Code Section 17600 does not create a private right of action to enforce the statute. 		statutory_interpretation 6DCA Sep. 15, 2020
People v. Superior Court (Frezier)
Calculation of maximum term of commitment for persons committed to state hospital under Penal Code Section 1026 includes credits for days served in actual custody and conduct credits under Section 4019. 		statutory_interpretation 4DCA/1 Sep. 15, 2020
Von Tobel v. Benedetti
If Supreme Court precedent does not provide 'clear answer to the presented question,' state court's decision cannot be contrary to clearly established federal law. 		statutory_interpretation 9th Sep. 15, 2020
People v. Lombardo
Senate Bill 1437 is not an invalid amendment of either Propositions 7 or 115. 		statutory_interpretation 3DCA Sep. 14, 2020
City of Brentwood v. Department of Finance
City entered into third party construction contracts prior to executing public improvement agreements, in which its former redevelopment agency agreed to reimburse construction costs; thus, public improvement agreements were not 'enforceable obligations.' 		statutory_interpretation 3DCA Sep. 11, 2020
Dept. of Fair Employment and Housing v. Cathy's Creations, Inc.
Attorneys' fees under Code of Civil Procedure Section 1021.5 was properly denied to prevailing defendants in action brought by Department of Fair Employment and Housing under Government Code Section 12974. 		statutory_interpretation 5DCA Sep. 11, 2020
Dept. of Fair Employment and Housing v. Superior Court (Cathy's Creation Inc.)
Trial court erroneously construed its preliminary injunction order as final adjudication of the merits of underlying administrative complaint, and therefore violated separation of powers doctrine. 		statutory_interpretation 5DCA Sep. 11, 2020
People v. Chavez
Penal Code Section 1538.5 does not require trial court to hold evidentiary hearing when defendant's stated issue to be decided is not relevant to the motion to suppress. 		statutory_interpretation 2DCA/6 Sep. 11, 2020
U.S. v. Herrera
State government agencies who suffer losses that are included in the actual loss calculation under U.S.S.G. Section 2B1.1(b)(1) are properly counted as victims. 		statutory_interpretation 9th Sep. 10, 2020
Vosburg v. County of Fresno
An unincorporated association that satisfies the criteria for intervention and successfully contributes to the public interest litigation should be entitled to attorney fees. 		statutory_interpretation 5DCA Sep. 10, 2020
U.S. v. Asuncion
Section 401 of First Step Act, which reduced mandatory minimum penalties for repeat drug offenders, was inapplicable to defendant because he was sentenced before the statute's enactment. 		statutory_interpretation 9th Sep. 8, 2020
People v. Hartland
'People v. Oliver' and 'In re Michele D.'s consent doctrine is inapplicable to the kidnapping of an intoxicated, resisting, adult victim. 		statutory_interpretation 4DCA/2 Sep. 2, 2020
People v. Martinez
Where trial court revokes supervision and Legislature enacts ameliorative statute prior to or during pendency of appeal from revocation order, defendant is entitled to seek relief under new law. 		statutory_interpretation 2DCA/6 Sep. 2, 2020
People v. Cooper
Trial court erred by summarily denying defendant's Senate Bill No. 1437 petition without appointing counsel because right to counsel attaches upon filing facially sufficient petition alleging relief. 		statutory_interpretation 1DCA/1 Sep. 2, 2020
Reilly v. Marin Housing Authority
Section 8 beneficiary's compensation for providing in-home care for severely disabled adult daughter should be excluded from income in calculating the rental subsidy. 		statutory_interpretation CASC Sep. 1, 2020
By using our website, you agree to our use of cookies in accordance with our cookie policy. You can learn more about how we use cookies by reviewing our Privacy Policy here.