CA Pub. Decisions

1. PEOPLE v. ALEXANDER Part-II
   Aug 27, 2010
   On June 4, 1980, Julie Cross, an agent of the United States Secret Service, was murdered in the line of duty. Over a decade later, defendant Andre Stephen Alexander was charged with Cross's murder. In 1996, a jury convicted him of first degree murder (Pen. Code, § 187),[1] a…
2. PEOPLE v. ALEXANDER Part-III
   Aug 27, 2010
   On June 4, 1980, Julie Cross, an agent of the United States Secret Service, was murdered in the line of duty. Over a decade later, defendant Andre Stephen Alexander was charged with Cross's murder. In 1996, a jury convicted him of first degree murder (Pen. Code, § 187),[1] a…
3. PEOPLE v. ALEXANDER Part-IV
   Aug 27, 2010
   On June 4, 1980, Julie Cross, an agent of the United States Secret Service, was murdered in the line of duty. Over a decade later, defendant Andre Stephen Alexander was charged with Cross's murder. In 1996, a jury convicted him of first degree murder (Pen. Code, § 187),[1] a…
4. PEOPLE v. ALEXANDER Part-V
   Aug 27, 2010
   On June 4, 1980, Julie Cross, an agent of the United States Secret Service, was murdered in the line of duty. Over a decade later, defendant Andre Stephen Alexander was charged with Cross's murder. In 1996, a jury convicted him of first degree murder (Pen. Code, § 187),[1] a…
5. PEOPLE v. ALEXANDER Part-VI
   Aug 27, 2010
   On June 4, 1980, Julie Cross, an agent of the United States Secret Service, was murdered in the line of duty. Over a decade later, defendant Andre Stephen Alexander was charged with Cross's murder. In 1996, a jury convicted him of first degree murder (Pen. Code, § 187),[1] a…
6. PEOPLE v. ALEXANDER Part-VII
   Aug 27, 2010
   On June 4, 1980, Julie Cross, an agent of the United States Secret Service, was murdered in the line of duty. Over a decade later, defendant Andre Stephen Alexander was charged with Cross's murder. In 1996, a jury convicted him of first degree murder (Pen. Code, § 187),[1] a…
7. PEOPLE v. LOMAX Part-I
   Aug 27, 2010
   A jury convicted defendant of two robberies, with a murder in the course of the second. It found he had used a firearm in all the offenses and found true a robbery-murder special circumstance. Because the jury set the penalty at death, this appeal is automatic. Court affirm. <…
8. PEOPLE v. LOMAX Part-II
   Aug 27, 2010
   A jury convicted defendant of two robberies, with a murder in the course of the second. It found he had used a firearm in all the offenses and found true a robbery-murder special circumstance. Because the jury set the penalty at death, this appeal is automatic. Court affirm. <…
9. PEOPLE v. LOMAX Part-III
   Aug 27, 2010
   A jury convicted defendant of two robberies, with a murder in the course of the second. It found he had used a firearm in all the offenses and found true a robbery-murder special circumstance. Because the jury set the penalty at death, this appeal is automatic. Court affirm. <…
10. PEOPLE v. LOMAX Part-IV
    Aug 27, 2010
    A jury convicted defendant of two robberies, with a murder in the course of the second. It found he had used a firearm in all the offenses and found true a robbery-murder special circumstance. Because the jury set the penalty at death, this appeal is automatic. Court affirm. <…
11. PEOPLE v. LOMAX Part-V
    Aug 27, 2010
    A jury convicted defendant of two robberies, with a murder in the course of the second. It found he had used a firearm in all the offenses and found true a robbery-murder special circumstance. Because the jury set the penalty at death, this appeal is automatic. Court affirm. <…
12. IN RE ALFREDO REYES VALDEZ Part-I
    Aug 27, 2010
    On May 22, 1992, petitioner Alfredo Valdez was sentenced to death for the April 30, 1989 murder of Ernesto Macias. On June 14, 2002, while the automatic appeal to this court was pending, Valdez filed a petition for writ of habeas corpus. On January 6, 2004, in the automatic appea…
13. IN RE ALFREDO REYES VALDEZ Part-II
    Aug 27, 2010
    The order to show cause is discharged and the petition for writ of habeas corpus is denied. <br />
14. SAN JOSE v. OPERATING ENGINEERS LOCAL UNION NO. 3
    Aug 27, 2010
    In California, labor relations between most local public entities and their employees are governed by the Meyers-Milias-Brown Act (MMBA) (Gov. Code, § 3500 et seq.), which recognizes the right of public employees to bargain collectively with their employers over wages and other …
15. LOS ANGELES UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT v. GREAT AMERICAN INSURANCE COMPANY Part-I
    Aug 27, 2010
    Court have long recognized that â€
16. LOS ANGELES UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT v. GREAT AMERICAN INSURANCE COMPANY Part-II
    Aug 27, 2010
    Court have long recognized that â€
17. PEOPLE v. ANDERSON
    Aug 27, 2010
    Defendant was convicted of leaving the scene of an accident resulting in death,[1] and was placed on felony probation pursuant to Penal Code section 1203.1.[2] As a condition of probation, the court ordered defendant to pay restitution for the victim's final hospital expenses…
18. PEOPLE v. HERRERA Part-I
    Aug 27, 2010
    Defendant Honorio Moreno Herrera was a member of the criminal street gang known as â€
19. PEOPLE v. HERRERA Part-II
    Aug 27, 2010
    Defendant Honorio Moreno Herrera was a member of the criminal street gang known as â€
20. GALINDO v. SUPERIOR COURT OF LOS ANGELES COUNTY Part-I
    Aug 27, 2010
    Charged by felony complaint with threatening and resisting an arresting officer in the performance of his duties (Pen. Code, §§ 422, 69), petitioner Moises Galindo brought a Pitchess motion (see Pitchess v. Superior Court (1974) 11 Cal.3d 531; Evid. Code, §§ 1043-1045) for di…