Supreme Court of California Decisions
The California Supreme Court consists of seven justices, including a Chief Justice and six Associate Justices. The Court has the authority to review decisions in the California Courts of Appeal, decisions by the Public Utilities Commission, and any cases that result in a death sentence. In general, the California Supreme Court will review cases that involve issues that have statewide significance. It may review a matter in part or in its entirety.
The Court also oversees matters related to misconduct within the legal profession. It reviews recommendations by the Commission on Judicial Performance and the California State Bar on disciplining a judge or attorney. It has issued a California Code of Judicial Conduct, which consists of six canons, to guide judges in the state.
To serve as a justice, a candidate must have been admitted to practice law in California for the last 10 years, or must have served as a judge in a California state court for the same time. The Governor of California appoints justices to the Court, but the Commission on Judicial Appointments must confirm each appointment. Also, a newly appointed justice must face a retention referendum when the state next votes to elect a governor. The term of each justice lasts for 12 years, after which a retention election will determine whether they serve another term. The process is the same for the Chief Justice as for the Associate Justices.
A justice on the California Supreme Court may be removed if the state assembly votes to impeach them, and then two-thirds of the state senate votes to convict them. Removal also may follow an investigation of misconduct by the justice that results in a recommendation of removal by the California Commission on Judicial Performance. Alternatively, the Commission may suspend or censure a justice.
- 2024 (18)
- 2023 (55)
- 2022 (57)
- 2021 (63)
- 2020 (79)
- 2019 (82)
- 2018 (97)
- 2017 (94)
- 2016 (94)
- 2015 (81)
- 2014 (88)
- 2013 (92)
- 2012 (110)
- 2011 (91)
- 2010 (123)
- 2009 (115)
- 2008 (94)
- 2007 (123)
- 2006 (124)
- 2005 (124)
- 2004 (135)
- 2003 (131)
- 2002 (130)
- 1998 (1)
- 1996 (1)
- 1994 (1)
- 1993 (1)
- 1992 (1)
- 1991 (1)
- 1971 (1)
- 1968 (1)
- 1956 (1)
- 1948 (1)
- 1941 (1)
- 1920 (1)
- 1919 (1)
- 1853 (1)
Recent Decisions From the Supreme Court of California
Date: May 6, 2024
Docket Number: S279397
Justia Opinion Summary: The case involves Gustavo Naranjo and other plaintiffs who worked as guards for Spectrum Security Services, Inc. The plaintiffs alleged that Spectrum violated state regulations governing meal breaks by not providing…
Date: May 2, 2024
Docket Number: S267522
Justia Opinion Summary: In May 2019, police officers detained Marlon Flores in a Los Angeles neighborhood known for narcotics and gang activity. The officers observed Flores standing alone near a parked car, ducking behind it as they…
Date: April 29, 2024
Docket Number: S275940A
Justia Opinion Summary: The case involves Weldon K. McDavid, Jr., who was convicted of conspiracy to commit murder and attempted premeditated murder. McDavid, a shooting instructor, had a romantic relationship with Diana Lovejoy, who was going…
Date: April 22, 2024
Docket Number: S273797
Justia Opinion Summary: The Supreme Court of California was asked to interpret a witness dissuasion statute, Penal Code section 136.1, subdivision (b)(2), in a case involving defendant Raymond Gregory Reynoza. Reynoza was found guilty of…
Date: April 22, 2024
Docket Number: S277120A
Justia Opinion Summary: A group of non-convicted individuals detained at the Santa Rita Jail in Alameda County, California, filed a lawsuit against the county and a private contractor, Aramark Correctional Services, LLC. The detainees were…
Date: March 28, 2024
Docket Number: S276545
Justia Opinion Summary: The Supreme Court of California considered whether a health care agent, who had signed two contracts with a skilled nursing facility on behalf of a principal, had the authority to sign an optional, separate arbitration…
Date: March 25, 2024
Docket Number: S275431
Justia Opinion Summary: This case involves a wage dispute between an employee and his employer. The employee, George Huerta, filed a class action against his employer, CSI Electrical Contractors, seeking payment for unpaid hours worked. The…
Date: March 4, 2024
Docket Number: S266034
Justia Opinion Summary: The Supreme Court of California, in a case involving a dispute over California's lemon law, ruled in favor of the plaintiff, Lisa Niedermeier. Niedermeier had purchased a new Jeep Wrangler from FCA US LLC, which was…
Date: March 4, 2024
Docket Number: S277487
Justia Opinion Summary: In California, the People v. Hardin case involves the defendant, Tony Hardin, who is serving a life sentence without parole for a special circumstance murder he committed at age 25. Hardin challenged the…
Date: February 26, 2024
Docket Number: S273368
Justia Opinion Summary: In this case, the Supreme Court of California held that a trial court has discretion to grant or deny relief from a jury trial waiver under section 631(g) of the Code of Civil Procedure. The court is not required to…
Date: February 22, 2024
Docket Number: S275746
Justia Opinion Summary: In this case, the Supreme Court of California was asked to interpret the "collective engagement" requirement under the California Penal Code section 186.22(f) and its application to the proof of predicate offenses. This…
Date: February 8, 2024
Docket Number: S271483
Justia Opinion Summary: In this case before the Supreme Court of California, the court interprets the provisions regarding the modification of a revocable trust under California Probate Code sections 15401 and 15402. The dispute revolves around…
Date: February 5, 2024
Docket Number: S258376
Justia Opinion Summary: In 2019, the California Supreme Court ruled that the defendant, Oscar Manuel Vaquera, did not receive fair notice of the sentence that the prosecution was seeking in his case, which violated his right to due process.…
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.