eBriefs April 4, 2019
U.S. Supreme Court
Criminal Law and Procedure
The rule of Baze v. Rees and Glossip v. Gross govern all Eighth Amendment challenges, whether facial or as-applied, alleging that a method of execution inflicts unconstitutionally cruel pain.
Bucklew v. Precythe; filed April 1, 2019
Cite as 2019 S.O.S. 17-8151
A vocational expert’s refusal to provide private market-survey data upon the applicant’s request does not categorically preclude the testimony from counting as “substantial evidence.”
Biestek v. Berryhill; filed April 1, 2019
Cite as 2019 S.O.S. 17-1184
Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals
Martin v. City of Boise; filed April 1, 2019
Cite as 2019 S.O.S. 15-35845
Sanchez v. Barr; filed April 1, 2019
Cite as 2019 S.O.S. 14-71768
California Court of Appeal
A death knell order does not constitute a “trial” for purposes of Code of Civil Procedure §583.310, and an appellate decision reversing such an order does not trigger the three-year extension under §583.320(a)(3).
Rel v. Pacific Bell Mobile Services; First District, Div. Five; filed March 29, 2019
Cite as 2019 S.O.S. 1547
A request to the court that it retain jurisdiction under Code of Civil Procedure §664.6 must be made by the litigants, not their attorneys of record.
Mesa RHF Partners v. City of Los Angeles; Second District, Div. One; filed March 29, 2019
Cite as 2019 S.O.S. 1551
Criminal Law and Procedure
Asking questions, including incriminating questions, does not turn an encounter with law enforcement into a detention; a person is not detained as long as a reasonable and innocent person in the same position would have felt free to go.
People v. Chamagua; Second District, Div. Eight; filed March 29, 2019
Cite as 2019 S.O.S. 1553
A California choice-of-law clause in an arbitration agreement covering “all disputes” arising from the employment relationship does not remove the parties’ agreement to arbitrate wage claims.
Bravo v. RADC Enterprises, Inc.; Second District, Div. Eight; filed March 29, 2019
Cite as 2019 S.O.S. 1555
A 2019 amendment to Penal Code §832.7 that expands public access to certain peace officer records can be used to compel the disclosure of records created prior to 2019; although the records may have been created prior to 2019, the event necessary to “trigger application” of the new law—a request for records maintained by an agency— necessarily occurs after the law’s effective date.
Walnut Creek Police Officers Association v. City of Walnut Creek (First Amendment Coalition); First District, Div. Four; filed March 29, 2019
Cite as 2019 S.O.S. 1557
Assuming that the status of all alleged heirs must be determined simultaneously at a single hearing, an alleged heir did not suffer prejudice if the alleged heir could not show how a different result might have changed absent the error. In order for the mark on a document to be an official seal, it must include a signature by a public official. A court may find evidence to be inadmissible without an objection having been raised by a party.
Estate of Herzog; Fourth District, Div. Two; filed March 29, 2019
Cite as 2019 S.O.S. 1558
A set of homeowners were entitled to tax relief under Revenue and Tax Code §69.5 where they sold their original property and constructed a replacement property which, at the time of their claim, they owned and occupied as their primary residence; the fact that, to satisfy a bank requirement, they made temporary use of a limited liability company before taking title to their replacement property provides no justification under the terms of the statute or in logic or fairness for denying them the relief provided by §69.5.
Wright v. County of San Mateo; First District, Div. Four; filed March 29, 2019
Cite as 2019 S.O.S. 1565