Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
A false imprisonment claim may be made based upon private acts, or upon wrongful governmental detention. For detention by the police, proof of false imprisonment provides a basis to obtain a writ of habeas corpus. [2] Under common law, false imprisonment is both a crime and a tort.
Robinson v. California, 370 U.S. 660 (1962), is the first landmark decision of the United States Supreme Court in which the Eighth Amendment of the Constitution was interpreted to prohibit criminalization of particular acts or conduct, as contrasted with prohibiting the use of a particular form of punishment for a crime.
Lockyer v. Andrade, 538 U.S. 63 (2003), [1] decided the same day as Ewing v. California (a case with a similar subject matter), [2] held that there would be no relief by means of a petition for a writ of habeas corpus from a sentence imposed under California's three strikes law as a violation of the Eighth Amendment's prohibition of cruel and unusual punishments.
For the record: 5:14 p.m. Sept. 5, 2023: An earlier version of this article said former Sheriff’s Deputy Miguel Vega admitted wrongfully detaining a skateboarder in June 2020.The incident was in ...
The Penal Code enacted by the California State Legislature in February 1872 was derived from a penal code proposed by the New York code commission in 1865 which is frequently called the Field Penal Code after the most prominent of the code commissioners, David Dudley Field II (who did draft the commission's other proposed codes). [1]
The protesters were charged with felony conspiracy, false imprisonment, trespassing to interfere with a business, obstruction of a San Francisco prosecutors charge 26 pro-Palestinian demonstrators ...
This lawsuit was filed in 1987 by the plaintiff – Donald Lee McLaughlin – against the County of Riverside in California. He asked the United States District Court for the Central District of California to issue an injunction ordering that the County stop its policies on warrantless arrests, arguing that the practice may be unconstitutional. [2]
Malicious prosecution is a common law intentional tort.Like the tort of abuse of process, its elements include (1) intentionally (and maliciously) instituting and pursuing (or causing to be instituted or pursued) a legal action (civil or criminal) that is (2) brought without probable cause and (3) dismissed in favor of the victim of the malicious prosecution.