|
|
| |
Access State and Federal Case Law, plus U.S. Supreme Court cases —
for free!
Click on any of the case links below to view the full text of that case —
for free — through lexisONE®, a legal research and news service from LexisNexis®. Login is required — registration is free!
|
| |
State Courts -
California - July 21, 2006
|
| |
In re Geneva C., B187281,
COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT, DIVISION FOUR, July 21, 2006, Filed
View this case - free
|
Overview: Welf. & Inst. Code, ? 731, subd. (b), did not vest a juvenile court with the discretion to commit a minor to a camp community placement program for less than the maximum term to which an adult offender could be sentenced because ? 731, subd. (b), provided discretion only in computing a confinement term to the California Youth Authority.
|
|
| |
In re Jose Y., B183836,
COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT, DIVISION FOUR, July 21, 2006, Filed
View this case - free
|
Overview: Patdown search of minor on school grounds was proper under Cal. Const., art. I, ? 28, even if the officer had no reason to believe the minor was armed and dangerous, because the minor was not a student at the school and had a lesser right of privacy than a student properly on school grounds. The juvenile court properly admitted evidence of a knife.
|
|
| |
In re Marriage of Erickson & Simpson, D047470,
COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT, DIVISION ONE, July 21, 2006, Filed
View this case - free
|
Overview: There was no jurisdictional barrier to trial court's order requiring ex-husband to pay attorney fees pursuant to Fam. Code, ? 272, subd. (a), to law firm that previously represented ex-wife in marital dissolution proceedings; firm's request for direct fee payment was made while it was still attorney of record and with wife's express authorization.
|
|
| |
People v. Kirk, G035897,
COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT, DIVISION THREE, July 21, 2006, Filed
View this case - free
|
Overview: Defendant who was charged with offenses involving controlled substances was properly found ineligible for deferred entry of judgment under Pen. Code, ? 1000, because his prior guilty plea to an offense involving controlled substances in federal court, on which sentence had not been imposed, constituted a prior conviction for purposes of ? 1000.
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Back to Top |
| |
|
Worldwide
Feedback
Feedback