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

THE PEOPLE v. KURT MICHAELS (28 Cal.4th 486): Upholding Admissibility of Confessions and Special Circumstances in the Death Penalty

THE PEOPLE v. KURT MICHAELS (28 Cal.4th 486): Upholding Admissibility of Confessions and Special Circumstances in the Death Penalty

Date: Jul 19, 2002
THE PEOPLE v. KURT MICHAELS (28 Cal.4th 486): Upholding Admissibility of Confessions and Special Circumstances in the Death Penalty Introduction In the landmark case of The People v. Kurt Michaels...
Limiting Public Agencies' Access to Declaratory Relief under the California Public Records Act

Limiting Public Agencies' Access to Declaratory Relief under the California Public Records Act

Date: Jul 16, 2002
Limiting Public Agencies' Access to Declaratory Relief under the California Public Records Act Introduction In Steve A. FILARSKY v. SUPERIOR COURT of Los Angeles County, the Supreme Court of...
California Supreme Court Expands Application of PC 1203.044 to Theft of Trade Secrets and Non-Monetary Property

California Supreme Court Expands Application of PC 1203.044 to Theft of Trade Secrets and Non-Monetary Property

Date: Jul 12, 2002
California Supreme Court Expands Application of PC 1203.044 to Theft of Trade Secrets and Non-Monetary Property Introduction The People v. Alejandro Farell, 28 Cal.4th 381 (2002), is a landmark...
Eligibility of Attorney Fees for Indigent Employees Represented by Public Entities: LOLLEY v. CAMPBELL

Eligibility of Attorney Fees for Indigent Employees Represented by Public Entities: LOLLEY v. CAMPBELL

Date: Jul 9, 2002
Eligibility of Attorney Fees for Indigent Employees Represented by Public Entities: LOLLEY v. CAMPBELL Introduction LOLLEY v. CAMPBELL is a landmark decision by the Supreme Court of California that...
Reaffirming the Harmless Error Standard in Self-Representation Cases: PEOPLE v. CRAYTON

Reaffirming the Harmless Error Standard in Self-Representation Cases: PEOPLE v. CRAYTON

Date: Jul 9, 2002
Reaffirming the Harmless Error Standard in Self-Representation Cases: PEOPLE v. CRAYTON Introduction PEOPLE v. CRAYTON (28 Cal.4th 346, 2002) is a pivotal case from the Supreme Court of California...
Transferring Intent and Proximate Causation in Criminal Law: Analysis of People v. Bland

Transferring Intent and Proximate Causation in Criminal Law: Analysis of People v. Bland

Date: Jul 2, 2002
Transferring Intent and Proximate Causation in Criminal Law: Analysis of People v. Bland Introduction Case: The People v. Jomo K. Bland (28 Cal.4th 313) | Court: Supreme Court of California | Date:...
Interpretation of Penal Code Section 288.5(c): Clarifying Conjunctive Convictions in Continuous Sexual Abuse Cases

Interpretation of Penal Code Section 288.5(c): Clarifying Conjunctive Convictions in Continuous Sexual Abuse Cases

Date: Jun 18, 2002
Interpretation of Penal Code Section 288.5(c): Clarifying Conjunctive Convictions in Continuous Sexual Abuse Cases Introduction Case Name: The People, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. Lonnie Johnson,...
Relief from Voluntary Section 998 Settlements Due to Clerical Errors under Section 473(b)

Relief from Voluntary Section 998 Settlements Due to Clerical Errors under Section 473(b)

Date: Jun 18, 2002
Relief from Voluntary Section 998 Settlements Due to Clerical Errors under Section 473(b) Introduction The case of Capablo Zamora v. Clayborn Contracting Group, Inc. addresses a critical issue in...
Expansive Interpretation of Spousal Testimony Privilege Exception under Evidence Code §972(e)(2)

Expansive Interpretation of Spousal Testimony Privilege Exception under Evidence Code §972(e)(2)

Date: Jun 14, 2002
Expansive Interpretation of Spousal Testimony Privilege Exception under Evidence Code §972(e)(2) Introduction The case of The People v. Robert Gene Sinohui (28 Cal.4th 205) adjudicated by the Supreme...
Affirmation of Death Penalty in THE PEOPLE v. JACK GUS FARNAM: Upholding Procedural Fairness in Capital Sentencing

Affirmation of Death Penalty in THE PEOPLE v. JACK GUS FARNAM: Upholding Procedural Fairness in Capital Sentencing

Date: Jun 11, 2002
Affirmation of Death Penalty in THE PEOPLE v. JACK GUS FARNAM: Upholding Procedural Fairness in Capital Sentencing Introduction THE PEOPLE v. JACK GUS FARNAM (28 Cal.4th 107, 2002) is a significant...
Refining Fiduciary Disqualification: Understanding Section 21350(a)(4) in Rice v. Clark

Refining Fiduciary Disqualification: Understanding Section 21350(a)(4) in Rice v. Clark

Date: Jun 11, 2002
Refining Fiduciary Disqualification: Understanding Section 21350(a)(4) in Rice v. Clark Introduction In Owen S. Rice v. Richard L. Clark et al., 28 Cal.4th 89 (2002), the Supreme Court of California...
Presumed Fatherhood Affirmed Despite Non-Biological Paternity Admission in IN RE NICHOLAS H.

Presumed Fatherhood Affirmed Despite Non-Biological Paternity Admission in IN RE NICHOLAS H.

Date: Jun 7, 2002
Presumed Fatherhood Affirmed Despite Non-Biological Paternity Admission in IN RE NICHOLAS H. Introduction The landmark decision in IN RE NICHOLAS H. (28 Cal.4th 56) addresses a critical issue in...
Defining 'Entry' in Burglary: Window Screen Penetration Constitutes Building Entry – People v. Cuahtemoc Sanchez Valencia

Defining 'Entry' in Burglary: Window Screen Penetration Constitutes Building Entry – People v. Cuahtemoc Sanchez Valencia

Date: Jun 4, 2002
Defining 'Entry' in Burglary: Window Screen Penetration Constitutes Building Entry Introduction Case: The People, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. Cuahutemoc Sanchez Valencia, Defendant and Appellant....
Exclusionary Rule Enforced Over Good Faith Exception in Warrantless Parole-Based Search: People v. Willis

Exclusionary Rule Enforced Over Good Faith Exception in Warrantless Parole-Based Search: People v. Willis

Date: Jun 4, 2002
Exclusionary Rule Enforced Over Good Faith Exception in Warrantless Parole-Based Search: People v. Willis Introduction In the landmark case The People v. Gary Wayne Willis (28 Cal.4th 22, 2002), the...
Assessing Harmless Errors in California Death Penalty Sentencing: A Commentary on People v. Slaughter

Assessing Harmless Errors in California Death Penalty Sentencing: A Commentary on People v. Slaughter

Date: May 31, 2002
Assessing Harmless Errors in California Death Penalty Sentencing: A Commentary on People v. Slaughter Introduction People v. Michael Corey Slaughter (27 Cal.4th 1187) is a seminal case adjudicated by...
Admissibility of Prior Convictions and Juror Conduct in Capital Cases: People v. Steele

Admissibility of Prior Convictions and Juror Conduct in Capital Cases: People v. Steele

Date: May 31, 2002
Admissibility of Prior Convictions and Juror Conduct in Capital Cases: People v. Steele Introduction People v. Raymond Edward Steele, 27 Cal.4th 1230 (2002), is a landmark judgment by the Supreme...
Mandatory Imposition of State and County Penalties for Cocaine Possession: Analysis of PEOPLE v. TALIBDEEN

Mandatory Imposition of State and County Penalties for Cocaine Possession: Analysis of PEOPLE v. TALIBDEEN

Date: May 24, 2002
Mandatory Imposition of State and County Penalties for Cocaine Possession: Analysis of PEOPLE v. TALIBDEEN Introduction PEOPLE v. TALIBDEEN (27 Cal.4th 1151, 2002) is a pivotal Supreme Court of...
Abrogation of the Corpus Delicti Rule by Proposition 8 in People v. Jose M. Alvarez

Abrogation of the Corpus Delicti Rule by Proposition 8 in People v. Jose M. Alvarez

Date: May 24, 2002
Abrogation of the Corpus Delicti Rule by Proposition 8 in People v. Jose M. Alvarez Introduction People v. Jose M. Alvarez is a landmark decision by the Supreme Court of California that addresses the...
Government Immunity under Gov. Code §845 Affirmed in Courthouse Security Negligence Case

Government Immunity under Gov. Code §845 Affirmed in Courthouse Security Negligence Case

Date: May 21, 2002
Government Immunity under Gov. Code §845 Affirmed in Courthouse Security Negligence Case Introduction The case of DANA E. ZELIG, a Minor, et al. v. COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES et al. presents a pivotal...
Koontz v. People: Upholding the Rights to Self-Representation and Challenging Incompetency Claims

Koontz v. People: Upholding the Rights to Self-Representation and Challenging Incompetency Claims

Date: May 10, 2002
Koontz v. People: Upholding the Rights to Self-Representation and Challenging Incompetency Claims Introduction In the landmark case of The People v. Herbert Harris Koontz, decided by the Supreme...
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