Case # | Name | Category | Court | Judge | Published |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
A173171
|
Mendoza v. Superior Court (People)
An arraignment or plea on an amended complaint does not restart the statutory 60-day period for holding a preliminary hearing under Penal Code section 859b. |
Criminal Law and Procedure |
|
C. Fujisaki | Sep. 17, 2025 |
B335902
|
People v. Garcia
Because mental health diversion is disallowed in DUI cases, trial court did not err in denying mental health diversion for defendant when her case involved both DUI and non-DUI charges. |
Criminal Law and Procedure |
|
G. Weingart | Sep. 17, 2025 |
23-4092
|
U.S. v. Boudreau
Defendant's motion to suppress was properly denied when warrant to search his residence was supported by probable cause based on his specific grooming conduct. |
Criminal Law and Procedure |
|
D. Forrest | Sep. 17, 2025 |
24-2638
|
U.S. v. Patrick
Federal penalty statute allowed district court to simultaneously enter a total fine amount "due immediately" while establishing an installment schedule for payment due to defendant's indigent status. |
Criminal Law and Procedure |
|
R. Tallman | Sep. 16, 2025 |
B336859
|
People v. Millsap
Trial court lacked concurrent jurisdiction to resentence criminal defendant while his automatic capital appeal was pending before the Supreme Court because it had exclusive jurisdiction over the matter. |
Criminal Law and Procedure |
|
A. Mori | Sep. 15, 2025 |
B329413
|
People v. Orozco
Amending information to include conspiracy to commit murder charge right before jury selection was improper because the offense had not been shown by evidence at the preliminary hearing. |
Criminal Law and Procedure |
|
J. Wiley | Sep. 12, 2025 |
A168697
|
Modification: People v. Mendez-Torres
Modified jury instruction that defined the force required for robbery without any reference to the victim's physical resistance misstated the law and required reversal. |
Criminal Law and Procedure |
|
D. Chou | Sep. 12, 2025 |
B334998
|
People v. Mills
Reversal was not warranted where elderly criminal defendant with prior strikes sought reconsideration of his sentence to make him eligible for parole before the end of his life expectancy. |
Criminal Law and Procedure |
|
K. Yegan | Sep. 11, 2025 |
G064274
|
People v. Ball
Felony brandishing a firearm at a person in a motor vehicle does not require a showing that the victim experienced subjective fear. |
Criminal Law and Procedure |
|
N. Scott | Sep. 11, 2025 |
24-1253
|
U.S. v. Keast
District court erred when calculating defendant's sentence because his prior Oregon conviction for unlawful use of a weapon with a firearm enhancement did not constitute a "crime of violence" under the Sentencing Guidelines. |
Criminal Law and Procedure |
|
J. Sung | Sep. 11, 2025 |
23-1294
|
U.S. v. Green
District court did not abuse its discretion in denying criminal defendant pre-trial discovery related to selective enforcement claim where the defendant used a small sample size to support his motion. |
Criminal Law and Procedure |
|
K. Lee | Sep. 11, 2025 |
E083552
|
People v. Garcia
Trial and appellate courts lacked jurisdiction to rule on defendant's statutorily unauthorized petition to vacate fees when his conviction was final. |
Criminal Law and Procedure |
|
A. McKinster | Sep. 10, 2025 |
23-1439
|
U.S. v. Stennerson
Prohibition on possession of firearms by unlawful drug users did not facially violate the Second Amendment because it was consistent with the nation's history and tradition of firearm regulations. |
Constitutional Law, Criminal Law and Procedure |
|
D. Forrest | Sep. 10, 2025 |
24-3374
|
Jones v. City of North Las Vegas
Though officers' warrantless backyard entry was unlawful due to their tardiness in pursuing fleeing suspect, individual officer's shooting of attacking dogs after entry was entitled to qualified immunity. |
Criminal Law and Procedure, Immunity |
|
S. Mendoza | Sep. 9, 2025 |
23-2282
|
U.S. v. Jesenik
Omissions tethered to affirmative misstatements to investors were sufficient to support wire fraud convictions. |
Criminal Law and Procedure |
|
A. Hurwitz | Sep. 8, 2025 |
F088488
|
In re Grinder
Rule prohibiting use of hearsay testimony to prove a commitment offense involved the use of force or violence was procedural, rather than substantive, and did not apply retroactively. |
Criminal Law and Procedure |
|
D. Franson | Sep. 8, 2025 |
S151493
|
People v. Cardenas
Gang-murder special circumstance and death sentence reversed where changes to the laws on admissibility of hearsay evidence and required predicates meant there was now insufficient evidence to support the allegations. |
Criminal Law and Procedure |
|
L. Kruger | Sep. 5, 2025 |
G065079
|
Segura v. Superior Court (People)
For misdemeanor pretrial military diversion eligibility, veterans need only show a reasonable possibility of a service-related condition, not a nexus to the offense. |
Criminal Law and Procedure |
|
E. Moore | Sep. 4, 2025 |
C098819
|
People v. Parker
Trial court declining to give Judicial Council instruction on voluntary intoxication was not error where it provided an instruction that, when considered alongside other instructions, properly instructed the jury. |
Criminal Law and Procedure |
|
P. Krause | Sep. 4, 2025 |
24-1244
|
U.S. v. Taylor
District court revoking supervised release may sanction defendant based on violent history, breach of trust, and recidivism risk by imposing a lengthier sentence than suggested by Sentencing Guidelines. |
Criminal Law and Procedure |
|
S. Ikuta | Sep. 4, 2025 |
D083280
|
People v. Hart
Personal use of a firearm was not an ultimate fact of murder, so jury's not true finding regarding firearm allegation did not have preclusive effect on murder resentencing proceedings. |
Criminal Law and Procedure |
|
M. Buchanan | Sep. 3, 2025 |
C101402
|
People v. Isayev
Youthful offender's eligibility for Penal Code section 3051's Youth Offender Parole Program made him ineligible for Penal Code section 11709(d) resentencing. |
Criminal Law and Procedure |
|
P. Krause | Sep. 3, 2025 |
B340795
|
Arriaga v. Superior Court (People)
Delay of almost sixteen years between felony complaint and arraignment violated defendant's speedy trial right where the delay resulted in the loss of testimony that would have assisted his defense. |
Criminal Law and Procedure |
|
R. Adams | Sep. 3, 2025 |
A168758
|
People v. Midell
Defense counsel's repeated comparisons of defendant to an animal during closing to negate intent elements were invited error and could not serve as basis for Racial Justice Act claim. |
Criminal Law and Procedure |
|
T. Desautels | Sep. 2, 2025 |
F088265
|
People v. Baldwin
Limiting resentencing to juvenile offenders expressly sentenced to life without the possibility of parole rather than those serving a term of years with parole eligibility did not violate equal protection. |
Criminal Law and Procedure |
|
K. Meehan | Aug. 29, 2025 |
A168697
|
People v. Mendez-Torres
Modified jury instruction that defined the force required for robbery without any reference to the victim's physical resistance misstated the law and required reversal. |
Criminal Law and Procedure |
|
D. Chou | Aug. 29, 2025 |
S175660
|
People v. Aguirre
Retroactive application of Assembly Bill 333 invalidated death row inmate's gang-related enhancements, special circumstance, and death sentence due to prejudicial instructional error under outdated law. |
Criminal Law and Procedure |
|
P. Guerrero | Aug. 29, 2025 |
23-2342
|
U.S. v. Hunt
Despite defendant retaining a privacy interest in abandoned iPhone, because the subsequent search was warrant-based and reasonable, there was no Fourth Amendment violation. |
Criminal Law and Procedure, Evidence |
|
K. Lee | Aug. 28, 2025 |
B337683
|
People v. Gutierrez
Upon prima facie showing for relief under Penal Code section 1473.7 (insufficient advisement of immigration consequences), a court is required to appoint counsel to an indigent defendant. |
Criminal Law and Procedure |
|
D. Kim | Aug. 27, 2025 |
20-50182
|
U.S. v. Olivas
District court did not plainly err by admitting expert's opinion that gang "secretaries," such as defendant, know "everything" about gang activities because the statements were not explicitly about defendant's mental state. |
Criminal Law and Procedure |
|
R. Nelson | Aug. 26, 2025 |