People v. Jackson

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• interpreting discovery rule requiring defense to disclose witnesses he “intends to call” as those he “reasonably anticipates” calling

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

9 cases in this archive cite this case.

• Dubinka v. Judges of the Superior Court of California
  Ninth Circuit· 1994-04-08· cited 64×
• People v. Ardoin
  California Court of Appeal· 2011-06-03· cited 53×
• Dubinka v. Judges of Superior Court of State of California
  Ninth Circuit· 1994-04-08· cited 41×
• People v. Jackson
  California Court of Appeal· 2005-06-07· cited 38×
• Thompson v. Superior Court of L.A. Cty.
  California Court of Appeal· 1997-03-12· cited 19×
• People v. Landers
  California Court of Appeals, 5th District· 2019-01-14· cited 18×
• Woods v. Superior Court
  California Court of Appeal· 1994-05-16· cited 17×
• People v. Landers
  California Court of Appeal· 2019-01-14
• Moldea v. Ovitz
  District of Columbia· 2019-02-06

Cites

5 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

• Taylor v. Illinois
  Supreme Court· 1988-03-28· cited 1,952×
• United States v. Nobles
  Supreme Court· 1975-06-23· cited 1,718×
• Izazaga v. Superior Court
  California Supreme Court· 1991-08-30· cited 192×
• State v. Howard
  Ohio Supreme Court· 1978-12-07· cited 87×
• Hobbs v. Municipal Court
  California Court of Appeal· 1991-08-22· cited 18×