December 08, 2016 at 12:00 AM
1 minute read
C.A. 2nd;
B267494
The Second Appellate District affirmed a judgment. The court held that it was harmless error to fail to instruct that the transportation of drugs had to be for the purpose of sale where the jury found that the defendant possessed those same drugs for sale when he was stopped for a traffic violation.
Presented by BigVoodoo
Celebrating California law firms and legal departments driving the state's dynamic legal landscape.
This conference aims to help insurers and litigators better manage complex claims and litigation.
Recognizing innovation in the legal technology sector for working on precedent-setting, game-changing projects and initiatives.
The Court of Appeal, First Appellate District in San Francisco is accepting applications for a full-time regular Judicial Secretary I, Judic...
The County is looking for a skilled and seasoned County Attorney to oversee the Law Department in delivering top-tier legal services, repres...
Position Summary: The Corporate General Counsel will manage and coordinate all legal and compliance matters affecting the company. The Gen...
