§Why CasetextPricing

MAAS v. S.C. (PEOPLE)

Real Party in Interest, The People, Answer Brief on the Merits

49 Cited authorities

  1. In re Clark

    5 Cal.4th 750 (Cal. 1993)   Cited 3,135 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that "absent justification for the failure to present all known claims in a single, timely petition for writ of habeas corpus, successive and/or untimely petitions will be summarily denied"

  2. People v. Duvall

    9 Cal.4th 464 (Cal. 1995)   Cited 2,646 times
    Holding that a petition for writ of habeas corpus must include copies of reasonably available evidence

  3. In re Rosenkrantz

    29 Cal.4th 616 (Cal. 2002)   Cited 1,196 times
    Holding that Governor's reversal of parole grant is subject to state judicial review

  4. People v. Gonzalez

    51 Cal.3d 1179 (Cal. 1990)   Cited 727 times
    Holding that the “bare filing” of a petition for writ of habeas corpus does not trigger a right to discovery because a habeas corpus petition that fails to state a prima facie case for relief creates no cause or proceeding that would confer discovery jurisdiction

  5. People v. Romero

    8 Cal.4th 728 (Cal. 1994)   Cited 367 times
    Explaining that California's constitution grants original jurisdiction in habeas corpus to the California Supreme Court

  6. People v. Villa

    45 Cal.4th 1063 (Cal. 2009)   Cited 240 times
    Holding that collateral consequences, such as the loss of the license to practice medicine, sex offender registration, inability to vote, or inability to serve on a jury, do not constitute constructive custody

  7. People v. Cruz

    13 Cal.4th 764 (Cal. 1996)   Cited 287 times
    Holding that burglary of an inhabited vessel constituted burglary of "an inhabited dwelling house"

  8. People v. Pieters

    52 Cal.3d 894 (Cal. 1991)   Cited 282 times
    Referring to sections 12022.7 and 12022.9 as enhancements for “infliction of great bodily injury”

  9. Berkeley Hillside Pres. v. City of Berkeley

    60 Cal.4th 1086 (Cal. 2015)   Cited 112 times   32 Legal Analyses
    Remanding for reconsideration in light of clarified legal principles

  10. In re Lewallen

    23 Cal.3d 274 (Cal. 1979)   Cited 182 times
    In Lewallen, our Supreme Court concluded the trial court made two statements demonstrating the sentencing was influenced by the defendant's refusal to accept a proffered plea bargain.

  11. Section 10

    Cal. Const. art. VI § 10   Cited 403 times
    Granting original jurisdiction to courts in habeas matters

  12. Rule 8.516 - Issues on review

    Cal. R. 8.516   Cited 119 times

    (a)Issues to be briefed and argued (1) On or after ordering review, the Supreme Court may specify the issues to be briefed and argued. Unless the court orders otherwise, the parties must limit their briefs and arguments to those issues and any issues fairly included in them. (2) Notwithstanding an order specifying issues under (1), the court may, on reasonable notice, order oral argument on fewer or additional issues or on the entire cause. (b)Issues to be decided (1) The Supreme Court may decide

  13. Rule 2.251 - Electronic service

    Cal. R. 2.251   Cited 15 times

    (a)Authorization for electronic service When a document may be served by mail, express mail, overnight delivery, or fax transmission, the document may be served electronically under Code of Civil Procedure section 1010.6, Penal Code section 690.5, and the rules in this chapter. For purposes of electronic service made pursuant to Penal Code section 690.5, express consent to electronic service is required.[]= (Subd (a) amended effective January 1, 2022; previously amended effective January 1, 2007