Legal Opinion
Sanchez v. City of Modesto
California Court of Appeal
Decided December 6, 2006No. F048277PublishedCited by 41 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
WISEMAN, J.
The trial court granted the defense’s motion for judgment on the pleadings after ruling that the California Voting Rights Act of 2001 (CVRA; Elec. Code § 14025 et seq.) was facially invalid under the equal protection clauses of die state and federal Constitutions. It entered judgment against plaintiff Latino voters, who allege that, because of racially polarized voting in the City of Modesto, they are precluded from electing any candidates in the city’s at-large city council elections. No evidence has been presented in support of or in opposition to this claim. Rather, at a…
2Cases cited54 opinions
- United States v. SalernoSupreme Court of the United States · 1987
- Reynolds v. SimsSupreme Court of the United States · 1964
- Singleton v. WulffSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
- Powers v. OhioSupreme Court of the United States · 1991
- Plyler v. DoeSupreme Court of the United States · 1982
49 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by41 opinions
- Licudine v. Cedars-Sinai Medical CenterCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2016
- People v. Erica R.California Court of Appeal · 2015
- SC MANUFACTURED HOMES, INC. v. LiebertCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2008
- Northwest Energetic Services, LLC v. California Franchise Tax BoardCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2008
- Golden Eagle Land Inv., L.P. v. Rancho Santa Fe Ass'n, California Court of Appeal, 5th District2018
36 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.