Does the presumption of presumption apply where the law in question was unclear or uncertain when the lower court acted?
California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from People v. P.R. (In re P.R.), H046227 (Cal. App. 2019):
7. "Th[e] presumption . . . does not apply 'where the law in question was unclear or uncertain when the lower court acted.' " (People v. Diaz (1992) 3 Cal.4th 495, 567.)
"The most advanced legal research software ever built."
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.
Other Questions
Is a claim that a court abused its discretion in awarding restitution because the lower court applied an incorrect legal standard tantamount to a de novo review? (California, United States of America)
When reviewing a trial court's decision on the Miranda issue, does the court have to agree that a statement was obtained in violation of the Miranda Act? (California, United States of America)
How have courts interpreted the test for determining whether trial counsel acted or failed to act in the manner challenged on appeal? (California, United States of America)
Whether section 654 applies in a case is a question for the trial court? (California, United States of America)
On a motion to be heard by the Court of Appeal at the Superior Court of California for a change of venue, does the Court have any jurisdiction or authority to hear the motion? (California, United States of America)
What is the test for a motion where the Court of Appeal found that a lower court found that there was insufficient evidence to support the Plaintiff's claim? (California, United States of America)
Does Section 288 of the California Child Abuse and Lascivious Act apply to a person who wilfully and lewdly commits any lewd act? (California, United States of America)
What is the standard of review applied by appellate courts to a decision by a trial court to instruct or not to instruct a jury? (California, United States of America)
When a factual determination is challenged by an appellate court on the grounds that there is no substantial evidence to sustain it, can the appellate court substitute its deductions for those of the trial court? (California, United States of America)
Can an attorney act as a prosecutor before the California Superior Court and also act as an adviser to the California Board of Justice in an unrelated matter? (California, United States of America)
