13 Cited authorities

People v. Mendez
19 Cal.4th 1084 (Cal. 1999) Cited 982 times
Affirming the Court of Appeal's dismissal of the appeal for failure to obtain a certificate of probable cause
People v. Superior Court (Kaulick)
215 Cal.App.4th 1279 (Cal. Ct. App. 2013) Cited 445 times 2 Legal Analyses
Finding People have due process right to notice and opportunity to be heard on issue of danger to public at such hearing
In re Lance W
37 Cal.3d 873 (Cal. 1985) Cited 691 times
Finding that the Right to Truth-in-Evidence provision abrogated § 1538.5, subd.
People v. Howard
16 Cal.4th 1081 (Cal. 1997) Cited 438 times
Noting that court has full sentencing discretion upon revocation of probation in such circumstances
People v. Rizo
22 Cal.4th 681 (Cal. 2000) Cited 287 times
Holding that "a specific intent crime" that "focuses solely on the acts and intent of the violator" may be committed even if the defendant's intent is based on a mistaken understanding
People v. Scott
58 Cal.4th 1415 (Cal. 2014) Cited 169 times
Concluding in the context of similar language in Proposition 36 that “a defendant is ‘sentenced’ when a judgment imposing punishment is pronounced even if execution of the sentence is then suspended”
White v. Davis
13 Cal.3d 757 (Cal. 1975) Cited 290 times 1 Legal Analyses
Finding in the legislative history at least four “mischiefs” the amendment was intended to address, including “the improper use of information properly obtained for a specific purpose, for example ... the disclosure of it to some third party”
People v. Moret
180 Cal.App.4th 839 (Cal. Ct. App. 2010) Cited 54 times
Upholding probation condition requiring abstention from marijuana
In re Valenti
178 Cal.App.3d 470 (Cal. Ct. App. 1986) Cited 18 times
Finding "a significant difference in the quality and duration of punishment, as well as in resultant long-term effects, which are brought about by a conviction for a felony as opposed to that for a misdemeanor," and noting " felon is uniquely burdened by a diverse collection of statutorily imposed disabilities long after his release from prison"
People v. Rodola
66 Cal.App.4th 1505 (Cal. Ct. App. 1998) Cited 5 times
E021039 (Super.Ct.No. RIF-72310) Filed October 2, 1998 Opinion certified for partial publication. Pursuant to California Rules of Court, rules 976(b) and 976.1, this opinion is certified for publication with the exception of parts I and III. Appeal from the Superior Court of Riverside County, No. RIF-72310, Robert George Spitzer, Judge. Judge of the Municipal Court for the Western Riverside Judicial District, assigned by the Chief Justice pursuant to article VI, section 6 of the California Constitution
Section 28
Cal. Const. art. I § 28 Cited 2,119 times
Granting crime victims the right "[t]o reasonable notice of all public proceedings, including delinquency proceedings, upon request, at which the defendant and the prosecutor are entitled to be present"
Section 1166 - Gambling in Indian country
18 U.S.C. § 1166 Cited 113 times
In § 1166(a), Congress did not intend to create an implied right of action that would give states the right to sue to enjoin class III gambling even if such gambling was a nuisance that could be enjoined under state law.
Rule 8.252 - Judicial notice; findings and evidence on appeal
Cal. R. 8.252 Cited 592 times
(a)Judicial notice (1) To obtain judicial notice by a reviewing court under Evidence Code section 459, a party must serve and file a separate motion with a proposed order. (2) The motion must state: (A) Why the matter to be noticed is relevant to the appeal; (B) Whether the matter to be noticed was presented to the trial court and, if so, whether judicial notice was taken by that court; (C) If judicial notice of the matter was not taken by the trial court, why the matter is subject to judicial notice

PEOPLE v. VALENCIA

13 Cited authorities

Affirming the Court of Appeal's dismissal of the appeal for failure to obtain a certificate of probable cause

Finding People have due process right to notice and opportunity to be heard on issue of danger to public at such hearing

Finding that the Right to Truth-in-Evidence provision abrogated § 1538.5, subd.

Noting that court has full sentencing discretion upon revocation of probation in such circumstances

Holding that "a specific intent crime" that "focuses solely on the acts and intent of the violator" may be committed even if the defendant's intent is based on a mistaken understanding

Concluding in the context of similar language in Proposition 36 that “a defendant is ‘sentenced’ when a judgment imposing punishment is pronounced even if execution of the sentence is then suspended”

Finding in the legislative history at least four “mischiefs” the amendment was intended to address, including “the improper use of information properly obtained for a specific purpose, for example ... the disclosure of it to some third party”

Upholding probation condition requiring abstention from marijuana

Granting crime victims the right "[t]o reasonable notice of all public proceedings, including delinquency proceedings, upon request, at which the defendant and the prosecutor are entitled to be present"

In § 1166(a), Congress did not intend to create an implied right of action that would give states the right to sue to enjoin class III gambling even if such gambling was a nuisance that could be enjoined under state law.