Recently in Court News Category

The California Supreme Court is taking applications for the court’s first appointment to the State Bar Board of Trustees.

If you’re a current or aspiring California lawyer, you’ll need to remember that name: The State Bar Board of Trustees is the newly spruced-up incarnation of the State Bar’s Board of Governors. These are the people that give you the good — or not-so-good — news about attorney licensing and discipline.

So why the changes? And what, exactly, are the changes?

Hillary Clinton raised a few eyebrows when she hopped from the White House to her newly-purchased Chappaqua house in 2000. People don't mind a change of address, but they care when political-hopefuls move to a state without a multi-year residency requirement to run for office.

But what happens in states, like California, that have residency requirements that they don't enforce?

Superior Court Judge Garrett Wong ruled Tuesday that embattled San Francisco Sheriff Ross Mirkarimi can go back to his home for now. The Sheriff is still waiting for a court ruling on his job.

Mirkarimi has been embroiled in legal battles stemming from a domestic violence incident that occurred on New Year’s Eve last year.

Spring is a time for change and renewal, and the California Supreme Court will be experiencing both this year. One change you should be sure to note is the increase in filing fees for certain documents.

Effective August 30, 2011, the filing fee will be $325 for the following documents, if they are the first document filed in the Court of Appeal or the Supreme Court by a party other than the appellant or petitioner in a civil case:

California’s Assembly Budget Subcommittee on Public Safety voted yesterday to suspend expansion of the Court Case Management System (CCMS) due to escalating costs, reports the Los Angeles Times. The full legislature can now consider whether it wants to halt program expansions.

CCMS is a statewide computer modernization initiative to develop and deploy a unified case management system for the state’s 58 superior courts. The California Judicial Branch’s website claims that “CCMS will reduce operating costs, increase efficiency, and give Californians an unprecedented level of access to their courts.”

Of the 1,005 California judges who responded to the sexual orientation inquiry in the state’s latest judicial survey, 969 identified as heterosexual and 36 identified as gay or lesbian, reports the Los Angeles Times. Approximately 40 percent of the state’s judges selected the “none of your business” option; they refused to answer the question.

What is wrong with California that we’re asking for such private information from our jurists? Like most bureaucratic ills, this demand for disclosure originated in the legislative branch.

The U.S. Supreme Court declined to review the California Supreme Court’s 2011 People v. Maikhio warrantless search ruling this week. The denial could be bad news for California’s parks enthusiasts, as it means that game wardens still do not need a warrant to stop cars exiting the state’s hunting and fishing grounds.

The case originated in San Diego, where a game warden, who was surveilling a public fishing pier with a spotting telescope, witnessed fisherman Bouhn Maikhio catching and bagging either a lobster or a fish.

California Courts could face a new budget structure if Assemblyman Charles Calderon (D-Whittier) has his way.

Calderon is the author of AB 1208, a California court budget restructuring proposal that narrowly won approval in the legislature this week. The bill would strip the Judicial Council — and the court bureaucracy, the Administrative Office of Courts (AOC) — of its control over the court system’s $3 billion budget, and return control over the budget to the legislature, reports the Associated Press.

Before you find yourself in a tizzy over this headline, let's be clear: We're not promoting marijuana use. Frankly, we write posts and headlines about marijuana because you, dear readers, like to read them. And for that, we thank you.

The latest news in California medical marijuana law is that the California Supreme Court has unanimously voted to review three medical marijuana cases involving local ordinances that limit or ban marijuana dispensaries, reports the Los Angeles Times.

Oral arguments for California's statewide redistricting case, Vandermost v. Bowen, will be broadcast live on Tuesday, January 10, from 9 a.m. to 10 a.m. PST.

Arguments will be broadcast and webcast live on California Channel, a public affairs network. An archived audiocast will be available on California Channel on Wednesday, January 11.