Legal Opinion
Litmon v. Superior Court
California Court of Appeal
Decided November 4, 2004No. H027346, H027353PublishedCited by 27 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
McADAMS, J.
Joseph Johnson, Jr., and David Litmon, Jr., each request the issuance of a writ of mandate directing the trial court to vacate its order consolidating for trial two successive recommitment petitions filed pursuant to Welfare and Institutions Code section 6600 et seq., 1 the Sexually Violent Predator Act (SVPA). The question presented is whether the trial court has the power to consolidate such petitions. Although we conclude that the trial court does have the inherent power to consolidate SVPA petitions for trial, we hold that the exercise of that power in the present cases,…
2Cases cited27 opinions
- Faretta v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1975
- Press-Enterprise Co. v. Superior Court of Cal., County of RiversideSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Rutherford v. Owens-Illinois, Inc.California Supreme Court · 1997
- Cooley v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 2003
- Hubbart v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1999
22 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by27 opinions
- People v. LandauCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2013
- People v. CastilloCalifornia Supreme Court · 2010
- People v. LitmonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2008
- People v. UribeCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2011
- BOARD OF PRISON TERMS v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2005
22 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.