https://newsroom.courts.ca.gov/ en https://newsroom.courts.ca.gov/news/videophotos-make-uc-good-neighbor-v-regents-university-california Video/Photos: Make UC a Good Neighbor v. The Regents of the University of CaliforniaMartin.Novitski Wed, 04/03/2024 - 11:23 News Release Media pool photos available here. The court is posting this unprocessed video today due to technical issues that affected access to the livestreamed oral argument in this matter earlier today. A processed version of the video will be posted, along with videos of the other cases argued as part of the April 3, 2024 oral argument calendar, on the court's webcast library on a future date. View the recording below or on YouTube. | View the captions here. | View the full oral argument webcast here. Make UC a Good Neighbor et al. v. The Regents of the University of California et al. (Resources for Community Development et al., Real Parties in Interest), S279242 #23-93  Make UC A Good Neighbor v. Regents of University of California, S279242. (A165451; 88 Cal.App.5th 656, mod. 88 Cal.App.5th 1293a; Alameda County Superior Court; RG21110142.)   Petition for review after the Court of Appeal reversed the judgment in a civil action. This case presents the following issues: (1) Does the California Environmental Quality Act (Pub. Resources Code, § 21000 et seq.) (CEQA) require public agencies to consider as an environmental impact the increased social noise generated by student parties that a student housing project might bring to a community? (2) Under CEQA, when a lead agency has identified potential sites for future development and redevelopment in a programmatic planning document, is the agency required to revisit alternative locations for a proposed site-specific project within the program?  https://newsroom.courts.ca.gov/event/supreme-court-oral-argument Supreme Court Oral Argument Supreme Court Oral Argument Mayo, Lynne Thu, 08/06/2020 - 15:01 Tuesday November 03, 2020 @ 9:00 am to Tuesday November 03, 2020 @ 3:30 pm Image (Click the play icon) To view with the case information, visit here. Download Event Extended Details View Calendar (1)  Vazquez (Gerardo) et al. v. Jan-Pro Franchising International, Inc., S258191View Argument | Opinion filed 1-14-2021Vazquez v. Jan-Pro Franchising International, Inc., S258191.  (9th Cir. No. 17-16096; 939 F.3d 1045; Northern District of California No. 3:16-cv-05961-WHA.)  Request under California Rules of Court rule 8.548, that this court decide a question of California law presented in a matter pending in the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.  The question presented is:  Does the decision in Dynamex Operations West Inc. v. Superior Court (2018) 4 Cal.5th 903, apply retroactively? (2)  In re Palmer II (William M.) on Habeas Corpus, S256149View Argument | Opinion filed 1-28-2021#19-100  In re Palmer, S256149.  (A154269; 33 Cal.App.5th 1199; Riverside County Superior Court; CR29074.)  Review on the court’s own motion after the Court of Appeal granted relief on a petition for writ of habeas corpus.  The court limited review to the following issues:  (1) Did this life prisoner’s continued confinement become constitutionally disproportionate under article I, section 17 of the California Constitution and/or the Eighth Amendment of the United States Constitution?  (2) If this life prisoner’s continued confinement became constitutionally disproportionate, what is the proper remedy?  (3)  People v. Johnsen (Brian David), [Automatic Appeal], S040704View Argument | Opinion filed 2-1-2021This matter is an automatic appeal from a judgment of death. (4)  People v. Ramirez (Irving Alexander), [Automatic Appeal], S155160View Argument | Opinion filed 1-28-2021This matter is an automatic appeal from a judgment of death. (5)  People v. Baker (Paul Wesley), [Automatic Appeal], S170280View Argument | Opinion filed 2-1-2021This matter is an automatic appeal from a judgment of death. https://newsroom.courts.ca.gov/event/supreme-court-oral-arguments-october-7-2020 Supreme Court Oral Arguments for October 7, 2020 Supreme Court Oral Argument Mayo, Lynne Thu, 08/06/2020 - 14:57 Wednesday October 07, 2020 @ 9:00 am to Wednesday October 07, 2020 @ 2:30 pm Image Counsel will appear remotely and courtroom seating for the press will be strictly limited to achieve appropriate distancing. The public will continue to have access to argument via live-streaming.  Download Event Extended Details View the oral argument calendar here. (1)  In re Gadlin (Gregory) on Habeas Corpus, S254599 This case includes the following issue:  Under Proposition 57 (Cal. Const., art. I, § 32), may the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation categorically exclude from early parole consideration all prisoners who have been previously convicted of a sex offense requiring registration under Penal Code section 290?  (2)  People v. Gentile (Joseph, Jr.), S256698 The court limited review to the following issues:  (1) Does the amendment to Penal Code section 188 by recently enacted Senate Bill No. 1437 eliminate second degree murder liability under the natural and probable consequences doctrine?  (2) Does Senate Bill No. 1437 apply retroactively to cases not yet final on appeal?  (3) Was it prejudicial error to instruct the jury in this case on natural and probable consequences as a theory of murder? (3)  Sass (Deborah) v. Cohen (Theodore), S255262 The court limited review to the following issues:  (1) In a complaint that seeks an accounting of specified assets, is the plaintiff required to plead a specific amount of damages to support a default judgment, or is it sufficient for purposes of Code of Civil Procedure section 580 to identify the assets that are in defendant’s possession and request half of their value?  (2) Should the comparison of whether a default judgment exceeds the amount of compensatory damages demanded in the operative pleadings examine the aggregate amount of non-duplicative damages or instead proceed on a claim-by-claim or item-by-item basis? (4)  People v. Moses III (Antonio Chavez), S258143 The court limited review to the following issue:  Did the Court of Appeal err in reversing defendant’s conviction for human trafficking of a minor (Pen. Code, § 236.1, subd. (c)(1)) on the ground that defendant was communicating with an adult police officer posing as a minor rather than an actual minor? https://newsroom.courts.ca.gov/event/supreme-court-oral-arguments-september-2-2020 Supreme Court Oral Arguments for September 2, 2020 Supreme Court Oral Argument Bueno, Ivan Thu, 07/30/2020 - 17:02 Wednesday September 02, 2020 @ 9:00 am to Wednesday September 02, 2020 @ 2:30 pm Image Archive webcast is now available here. All opinions are now available. Download Event Extended Details (1)  People v. Long (Kimberly Louise), S249274View Argument | Opinion filed 11-30-20 This case presents the following issues:  (1) Did defense counsel render ineffective assistance by failing to consult a qualified expert on determining time of death and failing to present evidence regarding defendant’s clothing around the time of the crime?  (2) Did the decision of the Court of Appeal adhere to the controlling standards of appellate review? (2)  People v. Schultz (Michael Joseph), [Automatic Appeal], S114671View Argument | Opinion filed 11-23-20 This matter is an automatic appeal from a judgment of death. (3)  People v. Flinner (Michael William), [Automatic Appeal], S123813View Argument | Opinion filed 11-23-20 This matter is an automatic appeal from a judgment of death. (4)  People v. Turner (Chester Dewayne), [Automatic Appeal], S154459View Argument | Opinion filed 11-30-20 This matter is an automatic appeal from a judgment of death.