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...

    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
U.S. v. Castaneda
Vulnerable-victim sentence enhancement isn't appropriate where factors that make victim vulnerable are usual for victims of offense.
Criminal Law and Procedure May 6, 2001
U.S. v. Taylor
Defendant convicted of transporting minor for purposes of prostitution need not know victim was minor.
Criminal Law and Procedure May 6, 2001
Flowers v. Walter
Prohibition against forced administration of drugs to criminal defendant is new constitutional rule that may be retroactively applied in habeas proceeding.
Criminal Law and Procedure May 6, 2001
People v. Covington
Photograph of victim's injury taken by physician's assistant at request of police are not protected by privilege, but are medical testimony.
Criminal Law and Procedure May 6, 2001
Christman v. Suthers
Order
Criminal Law and Procedure May 3, 2001
Santillanes v. Lemaster
Order
Criminal Law and Procedure May 3, 2001
U.S. v. Gaddis
Order
Criminal Law and Procedure May 3, 2001
Daniels v. United States
Prior convictions not set aside by time of sentencing under Armed Career Criminal Act are presumptively valid for sentence enhancement.
Criminal Law and Procedure May 3, 2001
Lackawanna County District Attorney v. Coss
Prior conviction used to enhance state sentence not open to direct or collateral attack if defendant failed to exhaust all available remedies.
Criminal Law and Procedure May 3, 2001
U.S. v. King
Order
Criminal Law and Procedure May 3, 2001
Thompson v. Boone
Order
Criminal Law and Procedure May 3, 2001
Willett v. Smith
Order
Criminal Law and Procedure May 3, 2001
Altizer v. Poppell
Order
Criminal Law and Procedure May 3, 2001
U.S. v. Teague
Order
Criminal Law and Procedure May 3, 2001
US v. Dwyer
Order
Criminal Law and Procedure May 3, 2001
U.S. v. Romero
Order
Criminal Law and Procedure May 3, 2001
U.S. v. Rivera-Avelar
Order
Criminal Law and Procedure May 3, 2001
Morrison Knudsen Corp. v. U.S.
Order
Criminal Law and Procedure May 3, 2001
Barnett v. Lemaster
Order
Criminal Law and Procedure May 3, 2001
Mendez v. Brown
Order
Criminal Law and Procedure May 3, 2001
U.S. v. Sedillo
Order
Criminal Law and Procedure May 3, 2001
Chavez v. State of Oklahoma
Order
Criminal Law and Procedure May 3, 2001
Lyons v. New Mexico Dept. of Corrections
Order
Criminal Law and Procedure May 3, 2001
U.S. v. Patron
Order
Criminal Law and Procedure May 3, 2001
Mathers v. State
Sexually violent predator may not combine total commitment with community-based treatment.
Criminal Law and Procedure May 3, 2001
State v. Jenkins
Statute setting forth registration requirements for sexually violent predators is unconstitutionally vague.
Criminal Law and Procedure May 3, 2001
State v. Jacobs
Domestic violence offender has no standing to challenge warrantless search of victim's residence.
Criminal Law and Procedure May 3, 2001
Washington v. Van Buren
State breaches plea agreement when it makes remarks to court justifying imposition of exceptional sentence.
Criminal Law and Procedure May 3, 2001
State v. Hampton
Defendant, who files false inspection form for sewage disposal system with health department, may be convicted for filing false document with public agency.
Criminal Law and Procedure May 3, 2001
Washington v. King
Speedy trial period commences when information is filed, where long and unnecessary delay occurs in bringing defendant who is amenable to process to court.
Criminal Law and Procedure May 3, 2001