info alert banner:
COVID News Center:

Statewide emergency actions and updates on county court services and operations here

Oral Argument
Wednesday May 19, 2021
9:00 am - 12:00 pm

Supreme Court Oral Arguments for May 19, 2021

(Click the play icon) To view with the case information, visit here

All opinions are now posted.

 

 

(5) People v. Lewis (Vince E.), S260598
View Argument | Opinion filed 7-26-21

The court limited review to the following issues: & (1) May superior courts consider the record of conviction in determining whether a defendant has made a prima facie showing of eligibility for relief under Penal Code section 1170.95?  (2) When does the right to appointed counsel arise under Penal Code section 1170.95, subdivision (c)?

(6)  Busker (John) v. Wabtec Corporation et al., S251135
View Argument | Opinion filed 8-16-21

Request under rule 8.548 of the California Rules of Court 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 work installing electrical equipment on locomotives and rail cars (i.e., the ‘on-board work’ for Metrolink’s [Positive Train Control (PTC)] project) fall within the definition of ‘public works’ under California Labor Code § 1720, subdivision (a)(1), either (a) as constituting ‘construction’ or ‘installation’ under the statute or (b) as being integral to other work performed for the PTC project on the wayside (i.e., the ‘field installation work’)?”

(7)  Mendoza (Leopoldo Pena) et al. v. Fonseca McElroy Grinding Co., Inc., et al., S253574
View Argument | Opinion filed 8-16-21

Request under rule 8.548 of the California Rules of Court 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: “Is operating engineers’ offsite ‘mobilization work’ —including the transportation to and from a public works site of roadwork grinding equipment —performed ‘in the execution of [a] public work’ (Cal. Lab. Code, § 1772), such that it entitles workers to ‘not less than the general prevailing rate of per diem wages for work of a similar character in the locality in which the public work is performed’ pursuant to section 1771 of the California Labor Code?”