Legal Opinion

In Re Francisco M.

California Court of Appeal

Decided January 31, 2001No. B146747, B146905PublishedCited by 11 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion

WILLHITE, J. *

The law has long recognized that “[t]he duty to disclose knowledge of crime rests upon all citizens. It is so vital that one known to be innocent may be detained, in the absence of bail, as a material witness.” (Stein v. New York (1953) 346 U.S. 156, 184 [73 S.Ct. 1077, 1092, 97 L.Ed. 1522], fn. omitted; see Barry v. United States ex rel. Cunningham (1929) 279 U.S. 597, 616-618 [49 S.Ct. 452, 456-457, 73 L.Ed. 867].) In California, as applicable to witnesses deemed material for trial, this principle is embodied in Penal Code section 1332. Under that section, on an…

2Cases cited21 opinions

  1. Stein v. New YorkSupreme Court of the United States · 1953
  2. Blair v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1919
  3. Delaney v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1990
  4. People v. WoodheadCalifornia Supreme Court · 1987
  5. People v. CudjoCalifornia Supreme Court · 1993

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

3Cited by11 opinions

  1. State v. Hernandez-LopezSupreme Court of Iowa · 2002
  2. People v. BunyardCalifornia Supreme Court · 2009
  3. In the Matter of Justin Alexander Marshall Justin Alexander Marshall v. State of IowaSupreme Court of Iowa · 2011
  4. People v. RoldanCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2012
  5. In re D. W.California Court of Appeal · 2004

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

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

Powered by the Exa API