Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- Crime statistics (22)
- Criminal procedure (22)
- Ninth Circuit Survey (19)
- Juvenile offenders (17)
- Crime (16)
-
- Juvenile delinquents (15)
- Evidence (13)
- White collar crime (13)
- Sentences (12)
- Gang violence (10)
- Habeas corpus (10)
- United States (10)
- Death penalty (9)
- Homicide (9)
- Forfeiture law (8)
- California Department of Justice (7)
- Community policing (7)
- Office of the Attorney General (7)
- Rape (7)
- Searches and seizures (7)
- Bankruptcy (6)
- Child abuse (6)
- Criminal justice (6)
- Innocence Project (6)
- Ponzi schemes (6)
- Sentencing (6)
- Appeals (5)
- At-risk youth (5)
- California penal code (5)
- Department of Justice (5)
- Publication Year
- Publication
-
- Golden Gate University Law Review (120)
- California Agencies (61)
- Publications (59)
- Jesse Carter Opinions (58)
- Juvenile Justice Bulletin (52)
-
- National Institute of Justice Research in Brief (47)
- National Institute of Justice Office of Justice Programs (27)
- California Joint Committees (17)
- California Senate (15)
- GGU Law Review Blog (15)
- California Assembly (11)
- Annual Survey of International & Comparative Law (8)
- Reimagining Criminal Justice (8)
- Federal Documents (5)
- Cal Law Trends and Developments (4)
- Theses and Dissertations (4)
- Golden Gate University Environmental Law Journal (1)
- Interviews (1)
- Poverty Law Conference & Symposium (1)
- Press Releases (1)
- Student Publications (1)
- Publication Type
Articles 481 - 510 of 516
Full-Text Articles in Law
People V. Linson, Jesse W. Carter
People V. Linson, Jesse W. Carter
Jesse Carter Opinions
Defendant was properly convicted of second degree burglary because there was sufficient evidence to sustain the verdict, and the prosecutor did not commit prejudicial misconduct in his closing argument to the jury.
Caritativo V. Teets [Dissent], Jesse W. Carter
Caritativo V. Teets [Dissent], Jesse W. Carter
Jesse Carter Opinions
Writ of mandate would not issue to compel warden to institute proceedings to determine present sanity of defendant awaiting execution of death penalty after warden determined that there was not good reason to believe defendant was presently insane.
People V. Cole [Dissent], Jesse W. Carter
People V. Cole [Dissent], Jesse W. Carter
Jesse Carter Opinions
Medical opinion as to whether the victim's wound could have been self-inflicted was admissible and sufficient evidence supported the verdict finding defendant guilty of first-degree murder.
People V. Merkouris, Jesse W. Carter
People V. Merkouris, Jesse W. Carter
Jesse Carter Opinions
Defendant was due a new trial for his ex-wife's murder because trial court erred by permitting him to withdraw not guilty by reason of insanity plea over counsel's implied objection and because instructions to jury on lying in wait were improper.
People V. Nunn [Dissent], Jesse W. Carter
People V. Nunn [Dissent], Jesse W. Carter
Jesse Carter Opinions
An osteopath's conviction for selling prescriptions for narcotics was proper because the regulatory code's use of the phrase "good faith" was not vague, and the prosecution's attempt to obtain narcotics from the osteopath was not entrapment.
People V. Rios [Dissent], Jesse W. Carter
People V. Rios [Dissent], Jesse W. Carter
Jesse Carter Opinions
Defendant's arrest for the possession of heroin was lawful where the officer had reasonable cause to believe that defendant had committed a felony after defendant admitted that he had taken an injection of heroin two weeks before.
Willson V. Superior Court Of San Diego County [Dissent], Jesse W. Carter
Willson V. Superior Court Of San Diego County [Dissent], Jesse W. Carter
Jesse Carter Opinions
Although defendant's conduct observed by an officer did not of itself constitute reasonable cause to believe she was committing a felony, it was sufficient to justify the officer's reliance on information regarding defendant's bookmaking.
Hill V. Superior Court Of Humboldt County [Dissent], Jesse W. Carter
Hill V. Superior Court Of Humboldt County [Dissent], Jesse W. Carter
Jesse Carter Opinions
Court-appointed attorneys who defended an indigent client charged with murder were not entitled to a writ compelling compensation of more than $ 1,000, where the payment was comparable to other jurisdictions and to that received by public employees.
People V. Morlock, Jesse W. Carter
People V. Morlock, Jesse W. Carter
Jesse Carter Opinions
A specific intent to steal was an essential element of the crime of robbery, as distinguished from the crime of burglary, where the crime was complete when the accused had entered the house of another with intent to commit any felony.
People V. Malotte [Dissent], Jesse W. Carter
People V. Malotte [Dissent], Jesse W. Carter
Jesse Carter Opinions
Where defendant discussed with police officers in a secretly taped conversation the commission of a crime, namely, provision of prostitutes, there was no unreasonable invasion of privacy when the conversation was used against her.
People V. Penny, Jesse W. Carter
People V. Penny, Jesse W. Carter
Jesse Carter Opinions
A conviction for involuntary manslaughter was reversed because the jury was erroneously instructed on a civil standard of negligence rather than criminal negligence and the lack of due caution and circumspection.
People V. Jackson [Dissent], Jesse W. Carter
People V. Jackson [Dissent], Jesse W. Carter
Jesse Carter Opinions
Injuries to kidnapping victim, who had been allowed to exercise, eat, smoke, read, shave, bathe, and use a toothbrush, were trivial and thus, were not the type of injuries the legislature contemplated in providing the death penalty for kidnapping.
People V. Cavanaugh [Dissent], Jesse W. Carter
People V. Cavanaugh [Dissent], Jesse W. Carter
Jesse Carter Opinions
There was no error that was ground for reversal in a defendant's conviction for first-degree murder despite the prosecution's admission of other crimes allegedly admitted by the defendant and inflammatory photographs.
Bompensiero V. Superior Court Of San Diego County [Dissent], Jesse W. Carter
Bompensiero V. Superior Court Of San Diego County [Dissent], Jesse W. Carter
Jesse Carter Opinions
Defendant was properly indicted for participating in acceptance of bribes by a public official when granting a liquor license, the superior court acted properly so the judge was not disqualified, and the statute of limitations did not bar charges.
People V. Robinson [Dissent], Jesse W. Carter
People V. Robinson [Dissent], Jesse W. Carter
Jesse Carter Opinions
Where there was prima facie proof of the existence of a conspiracy, testimony concerning a co-conspirator's statements in furtherance of the conspiracy, though made in the absence of defendant, was admissible as an exception to the hearsay rule.
Hayashi V. Lorenz [Dissent], Jesse W. Carter
Hayashi V. Lorenz [Dissent], Jesse W. Carter
Jesse Carter Opinions
Plaintiffs failed to show any abuse of discretion by the trial court in dismissing their action for want of prosecution.
People V. Wolfe, Jesse W. Carter
People V. Wolfe, Jesse W. Carter
Jesse Carter Opinions
Remarks of the prosecuting attorney were not prejudicial to defendants because of the overwhelming evidence of defendants' guilt. A manslaughter instruction would have been improper because evidence supported first-degree murder or self-defense.
Mccracken V. Teets [Dissent], Jesse W. Carter
Mccracken V. Teets [Dissent], Jesse W. Carter
Jesse Carter Opinions
A trial court's refusal to issue a writ of mandate to compel a warden to inquire into the sanity of a prisoner under a death sentence did not have to be set aside on the basis of a misapprehension of the warden's duty or lack of express findings.
People V. Thomas [Dissent], Jesse W. Carter
People V. Thomas [Dissent], Jesse W. Carter
Jesse Carter Opinions
Instruction on lying in wait did not require a showing of intent to fix the degree and instruction distinguishing first and second degree murder in addition to the lying in wait instruction was sufficient.
People V. Haeussler [Dissent], Jesse W. Carter
People V. Haeussler [Dissent], Jesse W. Carter
Jesse Carter Opinions
At trial on charges of manslaughter and driving a vehicle under the influence of intoxicating liquor, admission of testimony concerning the results of a blood test taken without defendant's consent did not deprive her of due process of law.
People V. Daugherty, Jesse W. Carter
People V. Daugherty, Jesse W. Carter
Jesse Carter Opinions
First-degree murder conviction was upheld when the intent to torture was established and the jury dismissed the insanity defense when the defendant failed to establish his insanity by a preponderance of the evidence.
In Re Kelleher [Dissent], Jesse W. Carter
In Re Kelleher [Dissent], Jesse W. Carter
Jesse Carter Opinions
It was unlawful for two labor unions that were involved in a controversy as to which one should represent the employees to picket outside of the employer, so the picketers were lawfully arrested and their writs of habeas corpus were denied.
People V. Costa [Dissent], Jesse W. Carter
People V. Costa [Dissent], Jesse W. Carter
Jesse Carter Opinions
A deceased passenger's statement that defendant caused an automobile accident was admissible in defendant's trial for manslaughter as a spontaneous declaration.
People V. Evans, Jesse W. Carter
People V. Evans, Jesse W. Carter
Jesse Carter Opinions
A new trial was ordered following a conviction for lewd conduct with a child. It was not in accord with principles of justice and fair play to show the child defendant's picture and then take her into a room where defendant was the only occupant.
Green V. Gordon [Dissent], Jesse W. Carter
Green V. Gordon [Dissent], Jesse W. Carter
Jesse Carter Opinions
Commutation of sentence was in nature of a favor and could be granted upon conditions. Therefore, it was within governor's power to commute death sentence to life without parole even though no such statutory penalty existed for murder conviction.
People V. Gilliam [Dissent], Jesse W. Carter
People V. Gilliam [Dissent], Jesse W. Carter
Jesse Carter Opinions
Defendant's conviction of first degree murder and sentence of the death penalty were proper because there was no provocation for his conduct, and the circumstances showed an abandoned and malignant heart together with a consciousness of guilt.
People V. Le Beau [Dissent], Jesse W. Carter
People V. Le Beau [Dissent], Jesse W. Carter
Jesse Carter Opinions
The trial court properly convicted defendant of illegal possession of narcotics because the trial court did not err in permitting the prosecution to impeach its own witness where the prosecution was surprised and prejudiced the prosecution's action.
People V. Dessauer, Jesse W. Carter
People V. Dessauer, Jesse W. Carter
Jesse Carter Opinions
A defendant's murder trial did not violate due process where evidence was in form of transcript testimony taken at preliminary examination, agreed to by defendant's counsel and, showed that the issue of guilt and sanity were separately considered.
Coverstone V. Davies [Dissent], Jesse W. Carter
Coverstone V. Davies [Dissent], Jesse W. Carter
Jesse Carter Opinions
Because an assembly was unlawful, when police officers arrived upon the scene, they had the authority to arrest all those engaged in the commission of the unlawful act. Thus, warrantless arrests of such individuals were valid.
People V. Chessman [Dissent], Jesse W. Carter
People V. Chessman [Dissent], Jesse W. Carter
Jesse Carter Opinions
Reexamination of defendant's arguments as to the correctness and validity of the reporter's transcript were without merit and the transcript permitted a fair consideration and disposition of the appeal.