People v. Krivda
| Court | California Supreme Court |
| Citation | People v. Krivda, 105 Cal.Rptr. 521, 8 Cal.3d 623 (Cal. 1973) |
| Decision Date | 04 January 1973 |
| Docket Number | Cr. 15295 |
| Parties | , 504 P.2d 457 The PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Appellant, v. Judith KRIVDA et al., Defendants and Respondents. In Bank |
The Supreme Court of the United States on October 24, 1972, issued its judgment and mandate that 'the judgment of the Supreme Court of California in this cause be vacated, and that this cause be remanded to the Supreme Court of the State of California for further proceedings not inconsistent with the opinion of this Court.'
The opinion of the United States Supreme Court, reported at 409 U.S. 33, 93 S.Ct. 32, 34 L.Ed.2d 45, in part stated that
Pursuant to the mandate hereinabove quoted we have reexamined our opinion in the subject case (reported at 5 Cal.3d 357, 96 Cal.Rptr. 62, 486 P.2d 1262) and...
Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI
Get Started for FreeStart Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial
53 cases
-
People v. Chapman
...62, 486 P.2d 1262, judgment vacated and cause remanded (1972) 409 U.S. 33, 93 S.Ct. 32, 34 L.Ed.2d 45, reiterated (1973) 8 Cal.3d 623, 105 Cal.Rptr. 521, 504 P.2d 457; see Katz v. United States (1967) 389 U.S. 347, 88 S.Ct. 507, 19 L.Ed.2d 576.) This court has held that "in determining whet......
-
De Lancie v. Superior Court of State of Cal., San Mateo County
...885, 564 P.2d 1203; People v. Longwill (1975) 14 Cal.3d 943, 951, fn. 4, 123 Cal.Rptr. 297, 538 P.2d 753; People v. Krivda (1973) 8 Cal.3d 623, 624, 105 Cal.Rptr. 521, 504 P.2d 457; Curry v. Superior Court (1970) 2 Cal.3d 707, 716, 87 Cal.Rptr. 361, 470 P.2d 345; cf. Cardenas v. Superior Co......
-
Citizens for Parental Rights v. San Mateo County Bd. of Education
...that comparable federal and state constitutional provisions are not necessarily co-extensive (see, e.g., People v. Krivda, 8 Cal.3d 623, 624, 105 Cal.Rptr. 521, 504 P.2d 457; Rios v. Cozens, 9 Cal.3d 454, 455, 107 Cal.Rptr. 784, 509 P.2d 696), we need not explore potential variations in app......
-
Lorenzana v. Superior Court
...of privacy, and if so, whether that expectation has been violated by unreasonable governmental intrusion.' (People v. Krivda, 8 Cal.3d 623, 105 Cal.Rptr. 521, 504 P.2d 457; People v. Sirhan, supra, 7 Cal.3d 710, 741--743, 102 Cal.Rptr. 385, 497 P.2d 1121; People v. Bradley, supra, 1 Cal.3d ......
Get Started for Free