Legal Opinion

People v. Post

California Court of Appeal

Decided December 11, 2001No. B143588PublishedCited by 3 opinions

[Opinion certified for partial publication.*]

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion

TURNER, P. J.

I. Introduction

In the decision of In re Michael (1945) 326 U.S. 224, 227 [66 S.Ct. 78, 80, 90 L.Ed. 30], Associate Justice Hugo Black wrote: “All perjured relevant testimony is at war with justice . . . .” California has virtually surrendered in this war when it comes to perjury during depositions. As will be noted, we conclude that unless a deposition transcript in a workers’ compensation matter is executed by the deponent, the crime of perjury cannot be committed. In reaching this conclusion which is clearly at odds with the public interest, we urge our Legislature to…

2Cases cited48 opinions

  1. Jackson v. VirginiaSupreme Court of the United States · 1979
  2. People v. BolinCalifornia Supreme Court · 1998
  3. People v. OsbandCalifornia Supreme Court · 1996
  4. People v. OchoaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1993
  5. Keeler v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1970

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

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Edmund Y. Chein v. Richard Shumsky, Chief Probation Officer La County California State Attorney GeneralCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2003
  2. In Re RinggoldCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2006
  3. Edmund Y. Chein v. Richard Shumsky, Chief Probation Officer La County California State Attorney GeneralCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2003

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

Powered by the Exa API