Legal Opinion
MacKey v. Superior Court
California Court of Appeal
Decided June 28, 1990No. B050575PublishedCited by 6 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
TURNER, J.
Petitioner seeks a writ of mandate directing the respondent court to.honor his peremptory challenge under Code of Civil Procedure, section 170.6. Reaffirming our decision in People v. Superior Court (Hall) (1984) 160 Cal.App.3d 1081, 1084-1086 [207 Cal.Rptr. 131], we hold that a case assigned by a municipal court magistrate to a particular superior court department under a direct calendaring system is subject to the “10-day/5-day” rule of section 170.6. The petition is therefore granted.
Facts
After a preliminary hearing, petitioner was held to answer on felony charges and the…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Palma v. U.S. Industrial Fasteners, Inc.California Supreme Court · 1984
- Woodman v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1987
- People v. Superior Court (Hall)California Court of Appeal · 1984
3Cited by6 opinions
- People v. Superior Court (Lavi)California Supreme Court · 1993
- Zilog, Inc. v. Superior Court of Santa Clara Cty.California Court of Appeal · 2001
- Reygoza v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1991
- Shipp v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1992
- Abbott v. MandiolaCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1999
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.