Legal Opinion · Dissent

Hawkins v. Superior Court

California Supreme Court

Decided November 9, 1978No. S. F. 23682Published

1DissentRichardson, J.

I respectfully dissent. My disagreement with the majority is twofold: (1) the grand jury’s indictment procedure as presently used in California is expressly authorized by our state Constitution which also vests in the California Legislature the exclusive power to abolish or amend the procedure; and (2) even if we possessed the authority to modify the present grand jury system, no invidious discrimination or inequality exists which would mandate the postindictment hearing procedure fashioned by the majority.

1. No Judicial Power to Amend Indictment Procedure

There is a preliminary issue barely…

2Cases cited32 opinions

  1. Gerstein v. PughSupreme Court of the United States · 1975
  2. United States v. CalandraSupreme Court of the United States · 1974
  3. Coleman v. AlabamaSupreme Court of the United States · 1970
  4. Beck v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 1962
  5. People v. SirhanCalifornia Supreme Court · 1972

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

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

Powered by the Exa API