21 results for 'judge:"Corrigan"'.
J. Corrigan finds that the trial court should have suppressed the methamphetamine and revolver police found in defendant's car as the products of an unlawful search. His presence in a high crime area at night, ducking out of sight, fiddling with his shoes and refusing to acknowledge police officers are factors that police are not required to ignore. But they were not acts of outright evasion and did not combine to support an articulable and reasonable suspicion that he was involved in illegal conduct. Reversed.
Court: California Supreme Court, Judge: Corrigan, Filed On: May 2, 2024, Case #: S267522, Categories: Drug Offender, Firearms, Search
J. Corrigan, in an order applied to several different and otherwise apparently unconnected personal-injury cases with disputes over whether the amount in controversy exceeds the $75,000 minimum for federal courts to exercise diversity jurisdiction, finds that the estimates of amounts in controversy required by Florida's civil cover sheet on its own are not sufficient to satisfy a defendant's burden to demonstrate that the minimum amount in controversy is satisfied by a preponderance of the evidence. One of the four cases is remanded after application of this principle. Jurisdiction has been properly invoked in another, and the defendants in the two remaining cases are ordered to file jurisdictional supplements.
Court: USDC Middle District of Florida, Judge: Corrigan, Filed On: March 25, 2024, Case #: 3:23cv869, NOS: Motor Vehicle - Torts - Personal Injury, Categories: Tort, Jurisdiction
Want access to unlimited case records and advanced research tools? Create your free CasePortal account now. No credit card required to register.
Try CasePortal for Free
J. Mumin finds that the trial court should not have given a jury a concurrent intent instruction on an attempted murder charge. The evidence does not support the theory that, in his effort to kill his primary target, defendant was trying to create a "kill zone" to kill all the police outside the door of the room where he was hiding. The number of shots defendant fired and the openness of his target area only show he had a conscious disregard for life, not a specific intent to kill. Reversed in part.
Court: California Supreme Court, Judge: Corrigan, Filed On: August 17, 2023, Case #: S271049, Categories: Intent, Murder, Jury Instructions
J. Corrigan holds, in answer to a question certified from the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, that under the Motor Carriers of Property Permit Act a commercial automobile insurance policy remains in force only until its stated expiration date. So, an insurer's failure to timely cancel a truck driver's certificate of insurance with the department of motor vehicles did not mean the insurer was on the hook for a wrongful death claim stemming from a collision that occurred after the policy period ended.
Court: California Supreme Court, Judge: Corrigan, Filed On: July 24, 2023, Case #: S267746, Categories: Insurance, Transportation, Contract
J. Corrigan, in response to questions certified from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, holds that the Workers' Compensation Act does not bar an employee's spouse from suing an employer for negligence where the employee contracted Covid-19 at work and brought the virus home. The Act allows causes of action that are not legally dependent on an employee's injury, so it is irrelevant whether the employee ever became sick himself. Secondly, an employer does not owe a duty of care to protect an employee's household from Covid-19. Though forseeability and moral blame factors tend to impose a duty on the employer, the prospect of liability stemming from secondary infections would create untenable financial consequences for employers and impose significant burdens on the court system from the likely flood of complex cases.
Court: California Supreme Court, Judge: Corrigan, Filed On: July 6, 2023, Case #: S274191, Categories: Covid-19, Workers' Compensation
J. Corrigan finds that defendant's sentence for a burglary conviction improperly included a three-year probation term. Recent legislation that limits probation for most felonies to two years applies retroactively to cases that were nonfinal when the law became effective in 2021. Defendant, who agreed to the probation term when he pleaded guilty, will have the term shortened to two years while the rest of the plea bargain remains unchanged.
Court: California Supreme Court, Judge: Corrigan, Filed On: June 26, 2023, Case #: S271057, Categories: Burglary, Probation, Plea
J. Corrigan finds that the trial court properly sentenced defendant to death on murder, rape, torture, kidnap and firearm convictions. Though his original death judgment was reversed because a juror had been improperly discharged during the penalty phase, a retrial again ended with a death judgment. As with instructional, evidentiary or prosecutorial misconduct errors, an error in discharging a juror does not bar retrial on double jeopardy grounds. Also, he failed to support his due process, ineffective assistance, death penalty statute and other challenges. Affirmed.
Court: California Supreme Court, Judge: Corrigan, Filed On: June 8, 2023, Case #: S189373, Categories: Death Penalty, Murder, Double Jeopardy
J. Corrigan finds that the lower courts properly held that defendant was ineligible for pretrial mental health diversion after he was found guilty of resisting arrest with force or violence. A request for diversion must be made before adjudication, which means before the entry of a guilty or no contest plea or the attachment of jeopardy at trial. Affirmed.
Court: California Supreme Court, Judge: Corrigan, Filed On: June 5, 2023, Case #: S268925, Categories: Competence, Resisting Arrest