Legal Opinion
In Re Lugo
California Court of Appeal
Decided July 21, 2008No. A114111, A118706PublishedCited by 10 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
McGUINESS, P. J.
The proceeding giving rise to these consolidated appeals began simply enough with a habeas corpus petition filed by a prisoner who claimed his parole suitability hearing had not been conducted within the time specified in the Penal Code.1 From that modest beginning, the proceeding transmogrified into something unprecedented under California law—a habeas corpus class action on behalf of parole-eligible life prisoners in which the trial court has assumed a role as overseer of the Board of Parole Hearings (Board) on a range of matters far afield of the simple complaint…
2Cases cited27 opinions
- Auto Equity Sales, Inc. v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1962
- Ketchum v. MosesCalifornia Supreme Court · 2001
- Serrano v. PriestCalifornia Supreme Court · 1977
- PLCM Group, Inc. v. DrexlerCalifornia Supreme Court · 2000
- In Re RosenkrantzCalifornia Supreme Court · 2002
22 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by10 opinions
- In Re PratherCalifornia Supreme Court · 2010
- In Re MasonerCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2009
- In re IlasaCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2016
- Clear Lake Riviera Community Assn. v. CramerCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2010
- Bruns v. E-Commerce Exchange, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 2009
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.