Rule 8.224 - Transmitting exhibits

6 Citing briefs

  1. PEOPLE v. CASTILLOLOPEZ

    Appellant’s Answer Brief on the Merits

    Filed February 19, 2015

    (In re Brown (1973) 9 Cal.3d 612, 624.) //1 the Court pursuant to California Rules of Court, rule 8.224(a)(1), and has attached a copy ofthe exhibit as Appendix A for ease of reference. 5 A. Section 16470 Creates an Exception to the “Dirk or Dagger” Prohibition that Excludes from the Purview of Section 21310 All Folding Knives and Pocketknives Unless They Possess the Specific Characteristics Statutorily Defined by the Legislature Here is the law of the case as it applied to Castillolopez in 2012 and as it still stands today: “[A]ny person in this state who carries concealed upon the person any dirk or dagger is punishable by imprisonment in a county jail not exceeding one year or imprisonment pursuant to subdivision (h) of Section 1170.”

  2. PEOPLE v. YARBROUGH

    Respondent's Opening Brief on the Merits

    Filed August 17, 2011

    Welfare v. Wingo (1946) 77 Cal.-App.2d 316, 318 [where exhibit introduced in evidenceat trial and referred to in brief on appeal had not been transmitted to appellate court, appellate court relied on statementin brief as to content of exhibit].)” Asall trial court exhibits are automatically includedin the appellate record pursuant to California Rules of Court, rule 8.122(a)(3), this Court should take the * Respondenthas requested transfer of People’s Exhibits 4 and 5 to this Court pursuant to California Rules of Court, rule 8.224. The balcony maystill be viewed on the Google Maps website under the Street View feature at http://maps.google.com for the building’s address recordedin the reporter’s transcript.

  3. PEOPLE v. CASTILLOLOPEZ

    Respondent’s Opening Brief on the Merits

    Filed October 30, 2014

    For consistency, and because the precise type of knife is not generally in dispute, the People will refer to the knife by the common term pocketknife. A copyofa picture of the pocketknife that was introduced as Exhibit 2 (2 RT 105; CT 79)is attached for the court’s convenience as Appendix A. The People have asked the Superior Court to transmit the exhibit to this court under California Rules of Court, rule 8.224(a)(1). During deliberations, the jury requestedclarification on the definition . of dirk or dagger, specifically the phrase “locked into position.”

  4. PEOPLE v. WESTERFIELD

    Appellant’s Opening Brief

    Filed December 28, 2011

    All exhibits cited in this brief will be transferred to this Court. (Cal. Rules of Court, Rules 8.634(a) and 8.224(a)(1).) 228 (3 CT 682.)

  5. MANRIQUEZ

    Petitioner’s Amended Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus

    Filed January 10, 2008

    In light of the cumulative effect of all the errors and constitutional violations that occurred over the course of the proceedings in Petitioner's case, Petitioner's convictions and death sentences must be vacated to prevent a fundamental miscarriage of justice. 389 A172379801.1 VII. PRAYER FOR RELIEF WHEREFORE, Petitioner Abelino Manriquez respectfully requests that this Court: 1. Take judicial notice of the record, documents, pleadings and exhibits filed in this Court in People v. Abelino Manriquez, No. SO38073, and of the record, documents, pleadings and exhibits filed in the Los Angeles County Superior Court in People v. Abelino Manriquez, Los Angeles County Superior Court, No. VA004848; 2. Request that the original appendices referred to in this Petition be transmitted to the Court by the Clerk of the Superior Court (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 8.224); 3. Allow Petitioner a reasonable opportunity to supplement the evidentiary showing of the claims presented here to include legal and factual grounds for claims which become apparent from further investigation, or from allegations made in the return or informal opposition to the Petition, and to supplement or amend the Petition to include claims which may become known as a result of further investigation and information which may hereafter come to light; 4.

  6. PEOPLE v. SEUMANU (ROPATI) (Perluss, P.J., assigned justice pro tempore; Corrigan, J., not participating)

    Appellant’s Opening Brief

    Filed July 31, 2007

    37 Weaverv. Browersox (8" Cir.2006) 438 F.3832 184 Witherow v. Larkin (1975) 421 U.S. 35 146 Woldt v. People (Colo.2003) 64 P.3d 256 244 Woodson v. North Carolina (1976) 428 U.S. 305 247,253 XXIV Zant v. Stephens (1983) 462 U.S. 862 Statutes Evid Evid. Evid. Evid. Evid. Evid. Evid. Evid. Evid. Evid. Evid. Evid. Evid. Evid. Evid. Evid Pen. . Code, § 210 Code, § 353 Code, § 403(a) Code, § 452(g) Code, § 459(a) Code, § 702 Code, § 791 Code, § 1230 Code, § 1235 Code, § 1153 Code, § 1101 Code, § 1108(a) Code, § 1236 Code, § 1240 Code, § 1250 . Code, § 1401 Code, § 190(a) Cal. Pen. Code, § 190.1 (former) Pen. Code, § 190.2(b)(17) XXV 192,215,253 211 65 158 216 216 150,153,166 117 116 166 167 181 18] 117 116 134 150 242 227 68 Pen. Code, § 190.2(c) Pen. Code, § 190.2(d) Pen. Code, § 190.3(a) Pen. Code, § 1903.3(b) Pen. Code, § 1111 Pen. Code, § 1170(c) Pen. Code, § 1192.7(a) Constitutional Provisions U.S. Const., Amend. 5 U.S. Const. Amend. 6 U.S. Const., Amend. 8 U.S. Const. Amend. 14 Rules Cal. Rules of Court, Rule 8.224 Other Authorities 68 68 183 et passim 193 et passim 75 249 45 233 et passim 79 et passim 79 et passim 79 et passim 148 Amnesty International, “The Death Penalty: List of Abolitionist and Retentionist Countries” (Nov. 24, 2006), on Amnesty International website [www.amnesty.org].) CALCRIM No.1191 CALJIC No. 2.