How do I find the legal citation for a criminal court case that was held in California?
The case is People v. Cook and the most that I can find will only tell what the trial was about and the outcome. I want to use this case as a reference because it has all of the elements that I need to write a paper of a hypothecial scenario in my criminal law class. I've used Lexis and the case is not there and findlaw has it by searching the names but there are a lot of cases People v. Cook in Ca. I can find articles on the case and none say exactly the same thing and I need to get the case citation itself to find out if the defendant was charged with gross vehicular manslaughter or just vehicular manslaughter. The original characters in the case were Jardine Russell-deceased and Keith Cook-defendant. Can someone please tell me how else I might be able to find the citation for this case.
I apologize for the typo the names are Jadine Russell - deceased and Keith Cook. The case was heard in the Pomona Superior Court in December of 1998. Links that refer to the case are http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=950... Cook was already on probation for DUI when he hit a parked car that in turn hit Russell who refused blood because of her religion and she died. The links gives different verdicts so I don't know if Cook was charged with gross vehicular manslaughter or just vehicular manslaughter. I've tried to access the courts records but can't afford to pay the fee. Is there a free site where I can access this? I still can't find it in Lexis.
- John SLv 71 decade agoFavorite Answer
I am an expert on using Lexis, and I can assure you that there is no appellate decision, published or unpublished, involving a defendant named Keith Cook charged with manslaughter, nor any case involving anybody named Jardine Russell. There are two possible reasons: 1) you have the names wrong, or 2) this is a trial court matter which was not appealed. If it is a trial court case, the only way to find out anything about it would be to go to the superior court in the county where it happened and search the criminal index.
ADD: I am sorry I cannot provide you with a link to this information, but this is public record. Mr. Cook was originally charged with second-degree murder (PC 187), gross vehicular manslaughter while intoxicated (PC 191.5(a)), and driving under the influence and at .08% BA and causing injury (VC 23153(a) and (b)). The jury acquitted of murder and convicted on all other charges. Mr. Cook was sentenced to 10 years in prison.Source(s): 30+ years as a criminal defense attorney
- 3 years ago
First off, your declare does not keep a lot validity. It appears like a realistic blunders now not falsification. He generally wrote your plate down in his pocket book which had different calls and combined it up. He generally noticed you out riding, realised you did not heed his caution and mailed you a quotation. You declare your all approximately accountability, but you drove a auto that was once now not inspected. Further, you had been conscious that the auto was once now not inspected and also you didn't right the crisis. In order so that you can have any validity whatever you ought to train what you hold forth. Being liable approach obeying the legislation. You are conscious of the inspection requisites or even after being informed by means of a cop you continue to didn't right the motion. I advise you spend somewhat extra time within the military, its transparent to me you have not discovered what liable and responsibility approach. You don't have any groundwork for a lawsuit. First off, crook court docket does now not manage court cases - that's civil court docket. Second, you might need to turn out that the officer deliberately falsified the quotation. It is NOT a crime for us to screw up. I have made tons whilst filling out tickets earlier than. Third, your argument does not keep any form of validity. I doubt you truthfully talked to an lawyer on account that no lawyer of their correct brain might don't forget your case on any form of merrit. They might inform you precisely what I mentioned, that you got a caution at Burger King any you didn't right the motion. The larger drawback is your failure to follow the inspection requisites. No lawyer goes to take a case that then understand they're going to lose from the get move. Don't come onto this board and disregard the navy by means of claiming to be a member of a department after which spewing crap. You began off speakme approximately accountability and responsibility, good now its time to reside it. Pay your pleasant, you understand as good as me and all people else that you just obtained busted reasonable and rectangular. Pay up then get the auto inspected.