6200072018_3bfbdea2df_z

Last week, we began another phase of our analysis of the standing of the Courts of Appeal in the California Supreme Court’s decision making, calculating three-year floating average votes to affirm each District of the Court of Appeal in civil and criminal cases.  Today, we begin the second half of that analysis with the civil

3208748350_2ed0d4ca83_z (2)

Last week, we completed our analysis of the reversal rates of each District and Division of the Court of Appeal.  Today, we begin our analysis of a related question: which Districts and Divisions have averaged the most votes to affirm the Court of Appeal’s decision each year?  Obviously, there’s a big difference between Districts which

2024103448_14b4782d3a_z

Today, we complete our two-week review of the reversal rates of the Districts and Divisions of the Courts of Appeal in civil and criminal cases between 2000 and 2015.

The Court has heard only two criminal cases from Division One of the First District between 2008 and 2015.  Both were affirmed.  Division Two of the

7616749922_8709323f7c_z

Yesterday, we addressed the District-by-District three-year floating reversal rates in civil cases in the Courts of Appeal from 2002 through 2007.  Today we turn our attention to the performance of the Courts of Appeal in criminal cases.

Division Two of the First District improved its performance consistently through these years – from one-quarter affirmance in

15243053769_9cda539123_z

Last week, we finished reviewing the voting patterns of the California Supreme Court in automatic death penalty appeals – how often was the Court’s decision unanimous, and how often did the Court have zero and one dissenter?  This week, we turn to the District-by-District reversal rates of the Courts of Appeal.

Because the districts of

14331207029_d3dc2cabfc_z

Yesterday, we continued our examination of the Court’s voting patterns, dividing the Court’s unanimity rate among the automatic death penalty appeals and the criminal non-death cases, and asking how often in the death penalty and “everything else” dockets the Court’s decision was lopsided – meaning either unanimous or one dissenter.  Today, we turn our attention

93184107_16d758513c_z

For the past few weeks, we’ve been looking further at the Court’s unanimity rate, dividing the Court’s docket into closely divided (2-3 dissenters) and lopsided decisions.  This week, we’ll take a closer look at the Court’s criminal docket, dividing the Court’s decisions into the automatic death penalty appeals and criminal non-death decisions – in other