Introducing ATLASLearn more
Legal Opinion

People v. Superior Court

California Court of Appeal

Decided November 1, 1989No. C006480PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

*1413Opinion

PUGLIA, P. J.

The People, petitioner in this proceeding, filed an amended petition for forfeiture in respondent superior court, alleging that monies paid to certain lawyers and law firms (defense attorneys) by their respective clients were traceable to exchanges of controlled substances, and were thus subject to forfeiture under the provisions of Health and Safety Code section 11470 et seq. Respondent court issued temporary restraining orders enjoining the defense attorneys from transferring, encumbering, hypothecating or otherwise disposing of the monies, and requiring them to show…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Caplin & Drysdale, Chartered v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1989
  2. Palma v. U.S. Industrial Fasteners, Inc.California Supreme Court · 1984
  3. United States v. MonsantoSupreme Court of the United States · 1989
  4. People v. BradleyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1969
  5. People v. BurtonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1989

4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. People v. Superior Court (Plascencia)California Court of Appeal · 2002
  2. Nasir v. Sacramento County Office of District AttorneyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1992
  3. People v. $28,500 United States CurrencyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1996
  4. In the Matter of U.S. Currency Totaling $14,245.00: Elias Orosco v. The State of WyomingWyoming Supreme Court · 2022
  5. Baca v. MinierCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1991

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

View API DocsGet API Key

Powered by the Exa API