What is the test for establishing that a Defendant's assignment of error is not sufficient to warrant an independent investigation into its merits?

California, United States of America


The following excerpt is from Pahmer v. Vasseghi, B242899 (Cal. App. 2014):

Defendants' "'mere naked assignment of error is . . . insufficient to warrant an inquiry into its merits. [Citation.]'" (Martter v. Byers (1946) 75 Cal.App.2d 375, 379.) "'[T]he burden rests on appellant to point out clearly and concisely not only the matters claimed to be erroneous, but the reasons why they are so; and upon his failure so to do, it will be deemed that such matters are not of sufficient importance to demand independent investigation.'" (Ibid.) Here, defendants did not refer to the record at all to support their legal argument. Defendants merely recite the law without attempting to apply the law to the facts of their case. "Appellate courts will not act as counsel for either party to an appeal and will not assume the task of initiating and prosecuting a search of the record for the purpose of discovering errors not pointed out in the briefs." (Fox v. Erickson (1950) 99 Cal.App.2d 740, 742.) Because defendants have failed to appropriately "support the

Page 6

arguments in its briefs by appropriate reference to the record, which includes providing exact page citations," we are "unable to adequately evaluate which facts the parties believe support their position . . . ." (Bernard v. Hartford Fire Ins. Co. (1991) 226 Cal.App.3d 1203, 1205.)

Other Questions


If defendant fails to establish all the errors of the trial court as a cumulative result of the cumulative error, can he continue to argue that the cumulative effect of the error was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt and mandates reversal? (California, United States of America)
If a tainted warrant affidavit is amended to remove tainted evidence from the warrant affidavit at issue, is the warrant sufficient to suppress evidence seized pursuant to the warrant? (California, United States of America)
Does the assumption that evidence sufficient to warrant a search warrant justify the officers in making a search without a warrant justify their actions? (California, United States of America)
Is a claim of federal constitutional error sufficient to invalidate a defendant's claim of state law error? (California, United States of America)
If an informant's information is sufficient to establish probable cause for arrest, is that information sufficient to warrant arrest? (California, United States of America)
When the error is that the error was not intentional, does the error result in the error not being corrected? (California, United States of America)
Is a defendant's failure to testify at the penalty phase an error not to instruct the jury to refrain from drawing any inference from the fact that defendant did not testify at penalty phase? (California, United States of America)
Is a police officer's application for a warrant sufficient to compel a magistrate to issue a warrant for the arrest of a minor? (California, United States of America)
When faced with a prosecutor's comment that a defendant's refusal to testify may constitute a harmless error, is this harmless error? (California, United States of America)
Can a search warrant be used to compel a defendant to travel by way of search warrant? (California, United States of America)
X



Alexi white


"The most advanced legal research software ever built."

Trusted by top litigators from across North America.