Log In
  • India
  • UK & Ireland
CaseMine Logo
Please enter at least 3 characters.
Parallel Search is an AI-driven legal research functionality that uses natural language understanding to find conceptually relevant case law, even without exact keyword matches.
Hi, I'm AMICUS. Your GPT powered virtual legal assistant. Let's chat.
  • Parallel Search NEW
  • CaseIQ
  • AMICUS (Powered by GPT)
  • Federal
    U.S. Supreme Court
    Federal Circuit
    1st Circuit
    2d Circuit
    3d Circuit
    4th Circuit
    5th Circuit
    6th Circuit
    7th Circuit
    8th Circuit
    9th Circuit
    10th Circuit
    11th Circuit
    Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit
    Board of Immigration Appeals
    Special Courts
    Bankruptcy
  • State
    Alabama
    Alaska
    Arkansas
    Arizona
    California
    Colorado
    Connecticut
    Delaware
    District Of Columbia
    Florida
    Georgia
    Guam
    Hawaii
    Iowa
    Idaho
    Illinois
    Indiana
    Kansas
    Kentucky
    Louisiana
    Massachusetts
    Maryland
    Maine
    Michigan
    Minnesota
    Missouri
    Mississippi
    Montana
    Nebraska
    North Carolina
    North Dakota
    New Hampshire
    New Jersey
    Northern Mariana Islands
    New Mexico
    Nevada
    New York
    Ohio
    Oklahoma
    Oregon
    Pennsylvania
    Puerto Rico
    Rhode Island
    South Carolina
    South Dakota
    Tennessee
    Texas
    Utah
    Virginia
    Vermont
    Washington
    Wisconsin
    West Virginia
    Wyoming
Log In Sign Up US Judgments
  • India
  • UK & Ireland

Alert

How is this helpful for me?

  • Creating your profile on CaseMine allows you to build your network with fellow lawyers and prospective clients. Once you create your profile, you will be able to:
    1. Claim the judgments where you have appeared by linking them directly to your profile and maintain a record of your body of work.
    2. Interact directly with CaseMine users looking for advocates in your area of specialization.
  • Creating a unique profile web page containing interviews, posts, articles, as well as the cases you have appeared in, greatly enhances your digital presence on search engines such Google and Bing, resulting in increased client interest.
  • The cases linked on your profile facilitate Casemine's artificial intelligence engine in recommending you to potential clients who might be interested in availing your services for similar matters.

  Know more  

Create your profile now
  • Commentaries
  • Judgments

California Case Commentaries

Clarifying Multiple-Murder Special Circumstances in California Death Penalty Cases: People v. Caro

Clarifying Multiple-Murder Special Circumstances in California Death Penalty Cases: People v. Caro

Date: Oct 7, 1988
Clarifying Multiple-Murder Special Circumstances in California Death Penalty Cases: People v. Caro Introduction The case of People v. Caro, decided by the Supreme Court of California on October 6,...
Reaffirming Voluntariness in Self-Incrimination Claims: People v. Jennings (1988)

Reaffirming Voluntariness in Self-Incrimination Claims: People v. Jennings (1988)

Date: Sep 20, 1988
Reaffirming Voluntariness in Self-Incrimination Claims: People v. Jennings (1988) Introduction People v. Michael Wayne Jennings is a landmark decision by the Supreme Court of California dated...
Establishing Standards for Severance and Special Circumstances in Capital Cases: People v. Bean

Establishing Standards for Severance and Special Circumstances in Capital Cases: People v. Bean

Date: Sep 20, 1988
Establishing Standards for Severance and Special Circumstances in Capital Cases: People v. Bean Introduction In People v. Anthony Cornell Bean (46 Cal.3d 919, 1988), the Supreme Court of California...
Ensuring Effective Counsel and Accurate Jury Instructions in Capital Cases: Insights from People v. Crandell (46 Cal.3d 833)

Ensuring Effective Counsel and Accurate Jury Instructions in Capital Cases: Insights from People v. Crandell (46 Cal.3d 833)

Date: Sep 16, 1988
Ensuring Effective Counsel and Accurate Jury Instructions in Capital Cases: Insights from People v. Crandell (46 Cal.3d 833) Introduction People v. Crandell is a landmark decision by the Supreme...
Affirmation of Death Penalty in People v. Russell Coleman: Application of Witherspoon Standard and Forensic Evidence Reliability

Affirmation of Death Penalty in People v. Russell Coleman: Application of Witherspoon Standard and Forensic Evidence Reliability

Date: Sep 9, 1988
Affirmation of Death Penalty in People v. Russell Coleman: Application of Witherspoon Standard and Forensic Evidence Reliability Introduction People v. Russell Coleman is a pivotal case adjudicated...
Proper Application of Multiple-Murder Special Circumstances under Penal Code § 190.2(a)(3): Analysis of People v. Bonin

Proper Application of Multiple-Murder Special Circumstances under Penal Code § 190.2(a)(3): Analysis of People v. Bonin

Date: Aug 30, 1988
Proper Application of Multiple-Murder Special Circumstances under Penal Code § 190.2(a)(3): Analysis of People v. Bonin Introduction People v. William George Bonin, 46 Cal.3d 659 (1988), is a...
Jury Composition and Admissibility of Prior Convictions in Capital Cases: An Analysis of People v. Karis

Jury Composition and Admissibility of Prior Convictions in Capital Cases: An Analysis of People v. Karis

Date: Aug 30, 1988
Jury Composition and Admissibility of Prior Convictions in Capital Cases: An Analysis of People v. Karis Introduction People v. James Leslie Karis, Jr., 46 Cal.3d 612, was adjudicated by the Supreme...
Affirmation of the Reasonable-Possibility Test in Capital Sentencing: People v. John G. Brown

Affirmation of the Reasonable-Possibility Test in Capital Sentencing: People v. John G. Brown

Date: Aug 26, 1988
Affirmation of the Reasonable-Possibility Test in Capital Sentencing: People v. John G. Brown Introduction People v. John G. Brown (46 Cal.3d 432, 1988) is a landmark decision by the Supreme Court of...
The People v. Timothy Jones et al.: Expanding Sentencing Discretion for Enumerated Sex Offenses

The People v. Timothy Jones et al.: Expanding Sentencing Discretion for Enumerated Sex Offenses

Date: Aug 26, 1988
The People v. Timothy Jones et al.: Expanding Sentencing Discretion for Enumerated Sex Offenses 1. Introduction The People v. Timothy Jones et al., 46 Cal.3d 585 (1988), is a landmark decision by the...
Affirmation of Guilt and Controversy Over Penalty Procedures in People v. Keenan

Affirmation of Guilt and Controversy Over Penalty Procedures in People v. Keenan

Date: Aug 26, 1988
Affirmation of Guilt and Controversy Over Penalty Procedures in People v. Keenan Introduction People v. Maurice J. Keenan is a pivotal 1988 decision by the Supreme Court of California that upheld the...
Reaffirmation of Acquittal-First Rule in Jury Deliberations: Insights from THE PEOPLE v. KURTZMAN

Reaffirmation of Acquittal-First Rule in Jury Deliberations: Insights from THE PEOPLE v. KURTZMAN

Date: Aug 19, 1988
Reaffirmation of Acquittal-First Rule in Jury Deliberations: Insights from The People v. Kurtzman Introduction The People v. David Kenneth Kurtzman (46 Cal.3d 322, 1988) is a pivotal case adjudicated...
Elden v. Sheldon: California Supreme Court Limits Emotional Distress and Consortium Recovery to Married Couples

Elden v. Sheldon: California Supreme Court Limits Emotional Distress and Consortium Recovery to Married Couples

Date: Aug 19, 1988
Elden v. Sheldon: California Supreme Court Limits Emotional Distress and Consortium Recovery to Married Couples Introduction The case of Richard C. Elden v. Robert Louis Sheldon et al. (46 Cal.3d...
Supreme Court of California Overrules Royal Globe: No Private Cause of Action Against Insurers Under Unfair Practices Act

Supreme Court of California Overrules Royal Globe: No Private Cause of Action Against Insurers Under Unfair Practices Act

Date: Aug 19, 1988
Supreme Court of California Overrules Royal Globe: No Private Cause of Action Against Insurers Under Unfair Practices Act Introduction In the landmark case of Parvaneh Moradi-Shalal v. Fireman's Fund...
Joint Trials and Jury Instructions in Death Penalty Cases: Insights from The People v. Richard Boyde

Joint Trials and Jury Instructions in Death Penalty Cases: Insights from The People v. Richard Boyde

Date: Aug 12, 1988
Joint Trials and Jury Instructions in Death Penalty Cases: Insights from The People v. Richard Boyde Introduction The People v. Richard Boyde is a landmark case adjudicated by the Supreme Court of...
Due Process Requires Enhancement Statutes to be Pledged and Proven: The PEOPLE v. HERNANDEZ

Due Process Requires Enhancement Statutes to be Pledged and Proven: The PEOPLE v. HERNANDEZ

Date: Aug 5, 1988
Due Process Requires Enhancement Statutes to be Pledged and Proven: The PEOPLE v. HERNANDEZ Introduction The case of The People v. James Hernandez (46 Cal.3d 194, 1988) addresses a critical issue in...
Effective Assistance of Counsel in Intoxication Defense: Insights from In re Antonio Cordero, Jr.

Effective Assistance of Counsel in Intoxication Defense: Insights from In re Antonio Cordero, Jr.

Date: Jul 29, 1988
Effective Assistance of Counsel in Intoxication Defense: Insights from In re Antonio Cordero, Jr. Introduction In re Antonio Cordero, Jr., on Habeas Corpus is a landmark 1988 decision by the Supreme...
Affirmation of Capital Sentencing Standards in People v. McLain

Affirmation of Capital Sentencing Standards in People v. McLain

Date: Jul 29, 1988
Affirmation of Capital Sentencing Standards in People v. McLain Introduction People v. Robert Cruz McLain (46 Cal.3d 97, 1988) is a pivotal decision by the Supreme Court of California that pertains...
Interpretation of Penal Code Section 190.4 in Felony-Murder Special Circumstances: In re Oscar Lee Morris

Interpretation of Penal Code Section 190.4 in Felony-Murder Special Circumstances: In re Oscar Lee Morris

Date: Jul 22, 1988
Interpretation of Penal Code Section 190.4 in Felony-Murder Special Circumstances: In re Oscar Lee Morris Introduction Case Title: The People, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. Oscar Lee Morris, Defendant...
Ensuring Defendant Competency: Reversal of Death Sentence in People v. Marks

Ensuring Defendant Competency: Reversal of Death Sentence in People v. Marks

Date: Jul 15, 1988
Ensuring Defendant Competency: Reversal of Death Sentence in People v. Marks Introduction People v. Marks (45 Cal.3d 1335, 1988) serves as a pivotal case in the realm of criminal law, particularly...
Comprehensive Commentary on People v. Bunyard: Establishing Precedent for Reversal of Death Penalty Under PEOPLE v. RAMOS

Comprehensive Commentary on People v. Bunyard: Establishing Precedent for Reversal of Death Penalty Under PEOPLE v. RAMOS

Date: Jul 12, 1988
People v. Bunyard: Establishing Precedent for Reversal of Death Penalty Under PEOPLE v. RAMOS Introduction In the landmark case of People v. Bunyard, the Supreme Court of California addressed...
Previous   Next
CaseMine Logo

Know us better!

  • Request a Demo
  • Watch Casemine overview Videos

Company

  • About Us
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms
  • Careers
  • Columns
  • Contact Us

Help

  • Pricing
  • Help & Support
  • Features
  • Workflow
  • CaseMine API
  • CaseMine's Bespoke AI Solutions
  • Judge Signup
  • Student Signup

CaseMine Tools

  • CaseIQ
  • Judgment Search
  • Parallel Search
  • AttorneyIQ
  • Browse Cases

© 2023 Gauge Data Solutions Pvt. Ltd.

Summary

Alert