You can potentially lose your license for driving under the influence of marijuana just as you can for driving under the influence of alcohol. There is law that can assist if you had a verifiable medical condition that masked your real condition at the time of driving. It is not any more illegal to drive when you are having an asthmatic attack any more than it is illegal to have heart attack when you drive. Fight it.
Thankfully, although judges commonly will ask the parties to address specific issues, they don't go so far as to control what issues thr parties will raise in the first instance. But most good judges recognize that there are certain issues of law that if not handled correctly by the Court could result in a reversal later on that would essentially mean a waste ov valuable time. There is a big difference between a pro-active judge trying to make good use of everyone's time and a judge who in...
If this case is truly filed as a misdemeanor petty theft then I would agree that $10k is a bit excessive. And some public ditfenders can be quite good. The only real problem with a PD is their lack of time with you. But you do get what you pay for in this business.
On the other, even a misdemeanor conviction for a drug related petty theft will negatively impact your future job prospects. And it will cost you money in the future if you try to expunge your criminal record. In short, this...
An appeal -in house- is sometimes referred to an informal appeal. This is to be contrasted with an order or judgement from a Superior Court which may be "formally" appealed to the State Appellate Court. For
example, a decision from the Dept. of Motor Vehicles can be appealed within the Dept. by filing an administrative appeal. The examples are too many to list.
By statute in California, certain orders may not be immediately appealed although they might be immediately challenged by a process called a "writ". But the judgement after a trial in California, whether it is by a jury or a judge without a jury, is subject to review on appeal. Whomever told you to the contrary is simply wrong. Or perhaps you may have misunderstood. Having worked at the Court of Appeals before I went into private practice I can assure you that Probate cases are no different.
While even a ruling from an evidentiary hearing can be challenged, the underlying question is whether or not it may realistically should. A $300 civil assessment will probably seem insignificant compared to the cost of challenging it in a higher court. And, for what it is worth, I agree with you. Just because the law presumes delivery by a presumption of a judicial act does not mean that you can't dispute actual receipt of notice.
Any time you go back to the Appellate Court and file a new document, even if it is to simply make a correction in a minor matter, it is always the proper thing to do to serve the other side with a corrected copy of the new document you have just filed. That way there will be no surprises later on. Your name and reputation, even as a pro per litigant, is of the highest importance.
I think you meant to say that your appointed appellate attorney failed to raise any issue on appeal, including the constitutional one. (Otherwise called a Wendy brief.) If that is the case the California supreme court will not consider it on direct review from the appellate court. You are then limited to raisi ng the issue by a Habeas Petition. And, in order to get to Federal court eventually you must file with them within one year after the state supreme court either denied the issue raised...