Case # | Name | Category | Court | Judge | Published |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
C098299
|
People v. Robinson
Grand jury was prior hearing that resentencing court could consider evidence from when determining whether petitioner was entitled to ameliorative resentencing relief for his murder conviction. |
Criminal Law and Procedure, Evidence |
|
L. Earl | Nov. 20, 2024 |
22-10286
|
U.S. v. Porter
Admission of propensity evidence does not violate Fifth Amendment due process principles where courts evaluate whether the probative value outweighs the potential for prejudice under Rule of Evidence 403. |
Evidence, Criminal Law and Procedure |
|
D. Bress | Nov. 18, 2024 |
D081490
|
People v. Corbi
Gang expert's trial testimony that defendant started a quarrel was improper because the jury did not need special knowledge to apply the expert's logic to the facts. |
Criminal Law and Procedure, Evidence |
|
W. Dato | Oct. 29, 2024 |
B322044
|
Richard v. Union Pacific Railroad Co.
Exclusion of expert testimony was error where the witness had experience and knowledge operating trains on tracks where accident occurred that could have assisted the jury in making its determination. |
Evidence |
|
N. Bershon | Oct. 28, 2024 |
D082304
|
People v. Ellis
Admission of propensity evidence of uncharged acts and instructing jury accordingly was not error where trial court conducted the analysis required by Evidence Code Section 352 pretrial. |
Criminal Law and Procedure, Evidence |
|
J. Castillo | Oct. 2, 2024 |
22-35674
|
Gregory v. State of Montana
District court improperly imposed severe evidentiary sanctions against defendants who had not displayed the requisite intent to destroy surveillance footage. |
Evidence, Civil Procedure |
|
D. Collins | Sep. 30, 2024 |
23-15335
|
Hyer v. City and County of Honolulu
Excluding expert reports in their entirety was error where the reports relied on facts that were not in evidence and were not speculative or unreliable, and exclusion resulted in prejudice. |
Evidence |
|
R. Paez | Sep. 24, 2024 |
D083446
|
Review granted: Snap v. Superior Court (Pina)
A history of posts by an allegedly violent victim featuring the firearm used in his murder was sufficient for finding good cause for a subpoena of his social media history. |
Evidence |
|
J. McConnell | Sep. 23, 2024 |
E081025
|
Huntsman-West Foundation v. Smith
Trial court properly granted summary judgment for defendant, who had no control over premises on which plaintiffs' property was stored and eventually lost. |
Torts, Evidence |
|
D. Miller | Sep. 10, 2024 |
A167548
|
People v. Tidd
Expert testimony linking gun cartridge to defendant's firearm lacked foundation, and its admission was both erroneous and prejudicial. |
Evidence |
|
A. Tucher | Sep. 3, 2024 |
H051516
|
DiMaggio v. Superior Court (People)
Trial court erred in applying good faith exception to exclusionary rule when police obtained the evidence by disregarding the timeframe limits specified in the warrant. |
Criminal Law and Procedure, Evidence |
|
A. Danner | Sep. 3, 2024 |
A167187
|
Malinowski v. Martin
Dashcam evidence of communications during supervised exchange of children involved in a domestic violence dispute was not confidential under the Privacy Act. |
Evidence, Family Law |
|
C. Fujisaki | Aug. 26, 2024 |
D083446
|
Snap v. Superior Court (Pina)
A history of posts by an allegedly violent victim featuring the firearm used in his murder was sufficient for finding good cause for a subpoena of his social media history. |
Evidence |
|
J. McConnell | Jul. 25, 2024 |
23-15405
|
BillFloat, Inc. v. Collins Cash Inc.
Because survey design issues did not render likelihood-of-confusion survey unreliable, district court's admission of survey was not abuse of discretion. |
Evidence, Intellectual Property |
|
M. McKeown | Jul. 2, 2024 |
22-899
|
Smith v. Arizona
Analyst's out-of-court statements offered in support of testifying expert's opinion were admitted for their truth where they were used to support the expert's opinion but only provided support if true. |
Evidence |
|
E. Kagan | Jun. 24, 2024 |
23-14
|
Diaz v. United States
Expert testimony about most drug couriers' mental states generally was not an opinion on the defendant's specific mental state when she was caught transporting drugs, so it was admissible. |
Evidence, Criminal Law and Procedure |
|
C. Thomas | Jun. 21, 2024 |
D081689
|
Audish v. Macias
Trial court did not abuse its discretion by admitting limited evidence about plaintiff's future eligibility for Medicare and expected amounts Medicare might pay for future medical services. |
Evidence, Torts |
|
J. McConnell | Jun. 10, 2024 |
21-10230
|
U.S. v. Blackshire
Domestic violence criminal defendant forfeited confrontation rights where evidence showed he intentionally took affirmative steps to dissuade the witness from testifying. |
Evidence |
|
A. Hurwitz | Apr. 22, 2024 |
D083310
|
People v. Flores
Outdated "fresh complaint" doctrine was updated such that a child victim's delay in disclosing sexual assault generally goes to the weight of the disclosure, not its admissibility. |
Evidence |
|
M. Buchanan | Apr. 17, 2024 |
22-50217
|
U.S. v. Mirabal
In federal criminal proceedings, the federal government is a party-opponent of the defendant, so government attorney statements in plea agreements and sentencing memoranda are party-opponent admissions and not hearsay. |
Evidence |
|
H. Thomas | Apr. 17, 2024 |
A165646
|
People v. Lozano
Deceased victim's statement to her mother regarding protracted pattern of sexual abuse was not admissible under the excited utterance hearsay exception because there had been time for her to reflect. |
Evidence |
|
A. Tucher | Apr. 12, 2024 |
A167246
|
People v. Rafael B.D.R.
Trial court erred by denying motion for a new trial following newly discovered evidence: a confession by defendant's ex-wife that her family intentionally invented abuse allegations to deport defendant. |
Evidence |
|
A. Tucher | Apr. 12, 2024 |
22-50069
|
U.S. v. Jose Jimenez-Chaidez
District court's decision to admit federal agent's cellphone testimony as lay rather than expert witness was proper given that the information provided did not require specialized knowledge. |
Evidence |
|
D. Forrest | Mar. 26, 2024 |
G061866
|
Marriage of Lietz
Trial court properly sustained objection to questions seeking to elicit expert testimony on case-specific fact about which the expert lacked independent knowledge and had not been independently proven by evidence. |
Evidence |
|
M. Sanchez | Feb. 9, 2024 |
D082229
|
Garner v. BNSF Railway Co.
Exclusion of causation experts opining on diesel exhaust exposure was improper because the analytical gap in the data was caused by a lack of scientific research on the subject. |
Evidence |
|
M. Buchanan | Jan. 5, 2024 |
21-10296
|
U.S. v. Motley
Warrant obtained using information from a prescription-monitoring program was valid given that defendant had no reasonable expectation of privacy because program was well-established and long-standing. |
Evidence |
|
M. Bennett | Jan. 2, 2024 |
B306910
|
Argueta v. Worldwide Flight Services, Inc.
Employee complaints against plaintiff who brought a sexual harassment lawsuit were inadmissible because their substance had minimal relevance to her credibility. |
Evidence |
|
M. Stratton | Dec. 7, 2023 |
A165289
|
Phillips v. Gordon
Department of Motor Vehicles could not rely on Evidence Code Section 664 test reliability presumption when blood drawing procedure did not follow Vehicle Code section requirements. |
Evidence |
|
T. Brown | Dec. 1, 2023 |
B321037
|
Yee v. Panrox International (USA), Inc.
Trial court did not err in determining that house lien overcame general presumption of validity when evidence provided the contrary. |
Evidence |
|
J. Wiley | Nov. 29, 2023 |
B321616
|
Modification: Brancati v. Cachuma Village, LLC
Trial court erred in excluding medical doctor's factually-based expert testimony to testify on impact of mold in plaintiff's residence to her health. |
Evidence |
|
A. Gilbert | Nov. 14, 2023 |