No. 23-609
Frander Salguero v. Court of Appeal of California, Second Appellate District, et al.
Response WaivedRelisted (2)
Tags: constitutional-duty false-evidence habeas habeas-corpus mandamus prejudice-test prosecutor-misconduct prosecutorial-misconduct structural-error
Latest Conference:
2024-04-12
(distributed 2 times)
Question Presented (from Petition)
1. Whether habeas is the sole remedy or remedy by mandamus is a permissible means to effectuate the constitutional duty to correct false evidence when a prosecutor refuses to perform.
2. Whether false evidence is structural error or some prejudice test must be employed to ascertain an acceptable amount of perjury.
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Whether habeas is the sole remedy or remedy by mandamus is a permissible means to effectuate the constitutional duty to correct false evidence when a prosecutor refuses to perform
Docket Entries
2024-04-15
Rehearing DENIED.
2024-03-27
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 4/12/2024.
2024-03-16
Petition for Rehearing filed.
2024-02-20
Petition DENIED.
2024-01-17
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 2/16/2024.
2023-12-28
Waiver of right of respondent The District of L.A. County, et al. to respond filed.
2023-10-12
Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due January 5, 2024)
Attorneys
Frander Salguero
Frander Salguero — Petitioner
The District of L.A. County, et al.
Nima Razfar — Office of the Attorney General , Respondent