Last week, we reviewed the data on which trial court produced the Supreme Court’s Third District civil cases from 1990 to 2019.  This week, we’re reviewing the Court’s criminal cases from the Third District.  There are twenty-three counties in California’s Third District: Alpine, Amador, Butte, Calaveras, Colusa, El Dorado, Glenn, Lassen, Modoc, Mono, Nevada, Placer, Plumas, Sacramento, San Joaquin, Shasta, Sierra, Siskiyou, Sutter, Tehama, Trinity, Yolo and Yuba.

The Court decided no Third District criminal cases in 1990.  In 1991 and 1992, it decided one per year – Placer county in 1991 and Sacramento county the following year.  In 1993, the Court decided two criminal cases from Sacramento and one from Butte.  In 1994, the Court decided one case each from Sacramento, San Joaquin and Yuba counties.

In 1995, the Court decided one criminal case from Glenn county.  The Court decided no criminal cases from the Third District in 1996.  It decided two in 1997 – one each from Shasta and Tehama.  In 1998, the Court decided one case from San Joaquin.  In 1999, the Court decided two cases from San Joaquin and one from Yuba county.

In 2000, the Court decided one criminal case from San Joaquin county.  In 2001, the Court decided two cases apiece from Sacramento and Tehama counties and one from San Joaquin, Shasta and Yolo.  In 2002, the Court decided two cases from Placer county and one from Sacramento and Shasta.  In 2003, the Court decided one case each from El Dorado, Lassen, Placer, Shasta and Tehama.  The following year, the Court decided three criminal cases from Sacramento, two from Shasta and one each from Butte, El Dorado, San Joaquin, Tehama and Trinity counties.

Join us back here tomorrow as we finish our review with the years 2005 to 2019.

Image courtesy of Flickr by Soomness (no changes).

In 2005, the Court decided five civil cases which originated in Sacramento and two from El Dorado.  In 2006, the Court decided five Sacramento cases and one each from Shasta and Sierra.  The following year, five cases originated in Sacramento and one each came from San Joaquin, Shasta and Sutter.  In 2008, four cases came from Sacramento and one from San Joaquin.  In 2009, the Court decided three cases from Sacramento and one each came from San Joaquin and Yolo counties.

In 2010, the Court decided one case from Sacramento, one from San Joaquin and one from Yolo county.  From 2011 to 2013, the Court’s only Third District cases came from Sacramento – one case in 2011, two in 2012 and one in 2013.  In 2014, the Court decided one case from Sacramento and one from San Joaquin.

In 2015, the Court decided one case from Sacramento county.  In 2016, the Court decided one Sacramento and one from San Joaquin.  In 2017, the Court decided three cases from Sacramento.  The following year, the Court decided one case from Shasta county.  So far in 2019, the court has decided one case from Plumas county.

In Table 1077, we compare each county’s share of the civil caseload to that county’s share of the total population of the Third District.

Sacramento county is by far the biggest county in the Third District, with 36.99% of the total population.  Of the Court’s Third District civil cases, 72.12% have originated in Sacramento.  San Joaquin has 17.87% of the total population, but only 10.58% of the cases.  Placer county has 9.08% of the population, but the Court decided no Placer county civil cases between 1990 and 2019.  Butte county accounts for 5.74% of the population and 0.96% of the civil cases.  Yolo county accounts for 5.24% of the population and 3.85% of the civil caseloads.

Among the smallest counties in the Third, Alpine county has only 0.03% of the total population, and has not produced a civil case for the Supreme Court since 1990.  Sierra county has 0.08% of the population and has produced 0.96% of the civil cases.  Modoc county is 0.25% of the total population and produced no civil cases between 1990 and 2019.  Trinity county accounts for 0.36% of the population and 0.96% of the civil cases.  Mono county has 0.37% of the total population and produced no civil cases for the Supreme Court’s civil docket between 1990 and 2019.

Join us later this week as we move on to the Court’s Third District criminal cases.

Image courtesy of Flickr by MoonJazz (no changes).

Over the past two weeks, we’ve reviewed the Supreme Court’s Second District civil and criminal cases since 1990.  This week and next, we’re looking at the Court’s Third District cases.

The Third District covers twenty-three California counties: Alpine, Amador, Butte, Calaveras, Colusa, El Dorado, Glenn, Lassen, Modoc, Mono, Nevada, Placer, Plumas, Sacramento, San Joaquin, Shasta, Sierra, Siskiyou, Sutter, Tehama, Trinity, Yolo and Yuba.

In 1990, the Court decided three civil cases which originated in Sacramento county.  In 1991, the Court decided three Sacramento cases and one from Yolo county.  In 1992, the Court decided four cases from Sacramento.  In 1993, the Court decided one Sacramento case, and in 1994, the Court decided one Sacramento case and one Trinity county case.

In 1995, the Court decided four civil cases which originated in Sacramento county.  In 1996, the Court decided five Fourth District civil cases – one each from Butte, Nevada, Sacramento, San Joaquin and Sutter.  In 1997, the Court decided three cases from Sacramento.  In 1998, the Court decided four cases from Sacramento.  The following year, the Court decided four cases from Sacramento, one from Calaveras and one from San Joaquin.

The Court decided two cases from Sacramento and two from San Joaquin in 2000.  The following year, the Court decided two cases from Sacramento and one from San Joaquin.  In 2002, the Court decided two cases from Sacramento county.  In 2003, the Court decided five cases from Sacramento.  In 2004, the Court decided three cases from Sacramento and one each from Shasta and Yolo counties.

Join us back here tomorrow as we review the data for the years 2005 to 2019.

Image courtesy of Flickr by Bureau of Land Management (no changes).

In 2005, the Court decided eight criminal cases from Los Angeles county.  In 2006, the Court decided five cases from Los Angeles and one from Santa Barbara.  The following year, the Court decided a dozen cases from Los Angeles and one from San Luis Obispo.  In 2008, the Court decided another dozen cases from Los Angeles and two from San Luis Obispo.  In 2009, the Court decided seven cases from Los Angeles and one from Ventura.

In 2010, the Court decided ten criminal cases from Los Angeles, two from Ventura and one from San Luis Obispo.  In 2011, the Court decided three cases from L.A. and two from Ventura.  The following year, the Court decided nine cases from Los Angeles and one from Ventura.  In 2013, the Court decided eight cases from Los Angeles and one from Santa Barbara.  In 2014, the Court decided nine cases from Los Angeles and two from Ventura.

In 2015, the Court decided three cases from Los Angeles and one from San Luis Obispo.  In 2016, the Court decided eight cases from Los Angeles.  In 2017, the Court decided eight cases from Los Angeles and one from Santa Barbara.  In 2018, the Court decided six cases from Los Angeles and one from Ventura.  In 2019, the Court has decided one case from L.A. and one from Ventura.

In Table 1070, we review each county’s share of the total population of the Second District, each county’s fraction of the total civil caseload of the District, and each county’s fraction of the total criminal caseload.

Los Angeles county accounts for 86.62% of the total population of the Second District according to the 2010 census.  Los Angeles had 91.79% of the civil case load, and 87.45% of the criminal case load.  Ventura county is 7.26% of the population, but only 2.74% of the civil cases.  Ventura is 6.84% of the criminal cases.  Santa Barbara is 3.74% of the total population, 4.21% of the civil case load and 3.04% of the criminal cases.  San Luis Obispo accounts for 2.38% of the population, 1.26% of the civil cases and 2.67% of the criminal cases.

Join us back here next week as we turn our attention to another District’s data.

Image courtesy of Flickr by Sam Howzit (no changes).

Last week, we examined the data for the county-by-county spread of the Supreme Court’s Second District civil cases.  This week, we’re looking at the Second District criminal cases.

In 1990, the Court decided no Second District criminal cases at all.  In 1991, the Court decided one case from Los Angeles.  In 1992, the Court decided four Los Angeles cases.  The following year, the Court decided five cases from Los Angeles and one from Ventura county.  In 1994, the Court decided five cases from L.A.

In 1995, the Court decided four criminal cases from Los Angeles and three from Ventura.  In 1996, the Court decided five cases from Los Angeles and one from Santa Barbara.  In 1997 and 1998, the Court decided six and ten cases, respectively, from Los Angeles.  The Court decided one case from Santa Barbara in 1998.  In 1999, the Court decided eleven cases from Los Angeles, three from Santa Barbara and one from San Luis Obispo.

The Court decided nineteen cases from Los Angeles in 2000, fifteen in 2001, sixteen in 2002, eleven in 2003 and nine in 2004.  The Court decided two cases from Ventura county in 2000 and one each in 2001 and 2002.  The Court decided one case from San Luis Obispo in 2004.

Join us tomorrow as we review the Court’s data for the years 2005 to 2019.

Image courtesy of Flickr by Bureau of Land Management (no changes).

In 2005, Los Angeles produced fifteen civil cases and one was from Santa Barbara.  In 2006, the Court decided eighteen cases from Los Angeles, two from Santa Barbara and one from San Luis Obispo.  In 2007, seventeen cases were decided which originated in Los Angeles and one was from Santa Barbara.  In 2008, the Court decided sixteen cases from Los Angeles and one from Ventura.  In 2009, the Court decided eleven cases from Los Angeles and one from San Luis Obispo.

In 2010, the Court decided thirteen cases from Los Angeles and one from San Luis Obispo.  The following year, the Court decided fifteen civil cases from Los Angeles and one from Ventura.  In 2012 and 2013, all the Court’s Second District civil cases were from L.A. – nine in 2012, fifteen in 2013.  In 2014, the Court decided ten cases from Los Angeles, one from Ventura and one from Santa Barbara.

Almost all of the Court’s civil Second District cases in recent years have originated in Los Angeles – eleven in 2015, twenty-two in 2016, fourteen in 2017, nine in 2018 and five so far this year in 2019.  The Court has decided only two other civil Second District cases – one from Ventura in 2018 and one from Santa Barbara in 2017.

Finally, we compare the counties’ population share to their share of the cases.

Los Angeles county accounted for 86.62% of the population according to the 2010 census, but 91.79% of the civil cases between 1990 and 2019.  Santa Barbara was 3.74% of the population and 4.21% of the cases.  Ventura was 7.26% of the population and only 2.74% of the cases.  Finally, San Luis Obispo accounted for 2.38% of the District’s population and 1.26% of the cases.

Join us back here later this week as we look at the Court’s Second District criminal cases.

Image courtesy of Flickr by Pacheco (no changes).

Last week, we reviewed the data on how the Supreme Court’s First District civil and criminal cases were distributed among the counties of the District.  Today, we’re looking at the Second District.

There are only four counties in the Second District – Los Angeles, Ventura, Santa Barbara and San Luis Obispo.  Given that Los Angeles accounts for 86.62% of the total population of the Second, it’ll surprise no one to hear that it also produces the overwhelming majority of the Second District cases.  Nonetheless, let’s go to the data.

In 1990, the Court decided thirteen cases from Los Angeles and two from Santa Barbara.  In 1991, the Court decided a dozen civil cases from L.A. and two from Ventura.  In 1992, the Court decided fifteen cases from Los Angeles and two from Santa Barbara.  In 1993, all ten of the Court’s Second District civil cases were from Los Angeles.  In 1994, the Court decided fourteen cases from Los Angeles, two from Santa Barbara and one from Ventura.

In 1995, the Court decided seventeen cases from Los Angeles, two from Santa Barbara and one from Ventura.  In 1996, the Court decided sixteen cases from Los Angeles and two from Santa Barbara.  In 1997, the Court decided seventeen cases from Los Angeles, two from Ventura and one from San Luis Obispo.  In 1998, the Court decided seventeen cases from Los Angeles and one from Ventura county.  In 1999, the Court decided twenty cases from Los Angeles and one each from Santa Barbara and San Luis Obispo.

In 2000, the Court decided twenty-one civil cases from Los Angeles and one from San Luis Obispo.  In 2001, the Court decided fifteen cases from L.A. and one from Santa Barbara.  In 2002, the Court decided fourteen cases from Los Angeles, two from Ventura and one from Santa Barbara.  In 2003, the Court decided thirteen cases from Los Angeles and one from Santa Barbara.  In 2004, all twenty-two civil cases decided from the Second District originated in Los Angeles county.

Join us back here next time as we address the years 2005 to 2019.

Image courtesy of Flickr by Robert Couse-Baker (no changes).

Last time, we reviewed the distribution of the First District’s criminal cases at the Supreme Court among the First’s counties between 1990 and 2004.  This time, we’re reviewing the data for the years 2005 to 2019.

In 2005, the Supreme Court decided one criminal case each from Alameda, Marin and San Mateo counties.  In 2006, the Court decided two cases each from Contra Costa, San Francisco and Solano counties and one from San Mateo.  The following year, the Court decided two cases from Alameda and one each from San Francisco and Solano.  In 2008, the Court decided one case each from Contra Costa, Lake and San Mateo counties.  In 2009, the Court decided two cases each from Alameda and Contra Costa.

In 2010, the Court decided one case each from Alameda, Contra Costa, San Francisco, Solano and Sonoma counties.  In 2011, the Court decided two cases from Contra Costa.  In 2012, the Court decided two cases from Alameda, two from Sonoma and one each from San Francisco, San Mateo and Solano counties.  In 2013, the Court decided one case from San Francisco.  In 2014, the Court decided one case each from Alameda, Contra Costa and San Mateo counties.

The Court decided two criminal cases from Contra Costa county in 2015 and one each from Alameda, San Francisco and Sonoma.  In 2016, the Court decided one case from Contra Costa.  The following year, the Court decided one case each from Contra Costa and Solano counties.  In 2018, the Court decided three cases from Alameda and one each from Contra Costa and San Francisco counties.  The Court has decided no criminal cases from the First District so far in 2019.

For the most part, each county’s overall share of the criminal cases from the First District was at least relatively close to that county’s share of the First District’s population.  Contra Costa accounted for 23.85% of the caseload and 18.45% of the population.  Alameda county accounted for 16.15% of the cases and 26.57% of the population.  San Francisco county produced 15.38% of the cases and 14.16% of the population.  San Mateo county produced 10% of the cases and accounted for 12.64% of the population.  Solano county produced 8.46% of the cases and 7.27% of the population.  Marin county accounted for 7.69% of the cases, but only 4.44% of the population.  Sonoma county produced 6.92% of the cases and 8.51% of the population.  Lake county produced 4.62% of the cases but only 1.14% of the population.  Mendocino county accounted for 3.85% of the cases but only 1.55% of the population.  Humboldt county was 2.31% of the caseload and 2.37% of the population.  Criminal cases from Napa county were quite rare – only 0.77% of the cases.  Napa is 2.4% of the population.  The Court decided no criminal cases from Del Norte county, and is only 0.5% of the total District population.

Join us later this week as we turn our attention to the Court’s Second District cases.

Image courtesy of Flickr by Nick Amoscato (no changes).

Last week, we tracked which county Circuit Courts accounted for the Supreme Court’s First District civil cases from 1990 to 2019.  This week, we’re looking at the criminal side.

In 1990, the Court decided one case each from Contra Costa county and Mendocino.  In 1991, the Court decided one case from Alameda, Humboldt and Sonoma.  In 1992, the Court decided two cases from San Francisco and one from Contra Costa.  In 1993, the Court decided one case each from five different counties: Humboldt, Lake, Mendocino, San Francisco and San Mateo.  In 1994, the Court decided one case from Contra Costa, one from San Mateo and one from Sonoma county.

In 1995, the Supreme Court decided two cases from Contra Costa county, two from San Francisco, and one each from Lake and Marin counties.  In 1996, the Court decided four from San Francisco, three from Contra Costa and one each from Marin and Napa.  The following year, the Court decided one case each from Alameda, Contra Costa, Marin, San Francisco and San Mateo counties.  In 1998, the Court decided one case from Contra Costa, one from San Mateo and one from Sonoma.  In 1999, the Court decided three criminal cases from Contra Costa, two from Alameda, and one each from Lake, Mendocino, San Francisco and Sonoma counties.

In 2000, the Court decided one criminal case each from Marin, San Francisco and Solano counties.  In 2001, it decided two cases from Marin and one each from Contra Costa, San Mateo and Solano.  The following year, the Court decided two cases from Alameda and Lake counties, and one case from each of five different counties: Humboldt, Marin, San Mateo, Solano and Sonoma.  In 2003, the Court decided two cases from Contra Costa and one from Marin.  Finally, in 2004, the Court decided two criminal cases each from four counties: Alameda, Mendocino, San Mateo and Solano, and one from Contra Costa and Marin county.

Join us back here tomorrow, when we’ll review the data for 2005 to 2019 and sum up.

Image courtesy of Flickr by HarshLight (no changes).

Last time, we began reviewing the Supreme Court’s civil cases from the First District, tracking the counties in which the cases originated, five years at a time.  Today we’re reviewing the data for the years 2005-2019.

In 2005, the Court decided five cases from San Francisco, two from Alameda and one from Marin.  In 2006, the Court decided six cases from San Francisco, three from Alameda, two from Humboldt and one from San Mateo.  In 2007, the Court decided four civil cases from San Francisco, two from Solano county and one each from Alameda, Contra Costa and San Mateo.  In 2008, the Court decided two cases from San Francisco and one each from Alameda and Humboldt counties.  In 2009, the Court decided two cases from San Francisco and one case each from Alameda, Marin, Mendocino and Sonoma.

In 2010, the Court decided three cases from San Francisco county, two from Alameda and one from Marin, Solano and Sonoma.  In 2011, the Court decided two cases from San Francisco and one each from Alameda and Contra Costa.  The following year, the Court decided two cases from Alameda and one each from San Francisco and San Mateo.  In 2013, the Court decided two cases from San Francisco and one each from Contra Costa and Marin.  In 2014, the Court decided two civil cases from Alameda county and one from San Francisco.

In 2015, the Court decided three civil cases from Alameda and two from San Francisco.  In 2016, the Court decided one case each from Alameda, San Francisco and San Mateo.  The following year, the Court decided three cases from Marin and one each from Contra Costa and San Francisco.  Last year, the Court decided three cases from San Francisco.  So far this year, the Court has decided four civil cases from San Francisco and one from Alameda.

So how do our totals compare to population?  Reviewing them five years at a time, of course there’s no particular reason to believe that the cases which make it to the Supreme Court should reflect the relative population of the District’s counties.  But over the course of thirty years, might the cases from a county become roughly proportional to population, and therefore (presumably) to total appeals coming out of that county?

In the Table below, we compare (1) the percentage of the First District’s total population accounted for by each county to (2) the percentage of total First District civil cases decided by the Supreme Court 1990-2019 which originated in that county.

Alameda accounts for 26.57% of the First District population but has only had 16.3% of the civil cases.  Contra Costa county is 18.45% of the population but only 7.49% of the cases.  San Francisco is 14.16% of the District population but accounted for 45.82% of the cases.  San Mateo was 12.64% of the population, but only 8.37% of the cases.  Three of the less populous counties were “overrepresented” in the sense that they accounted for a higher share of cases than population (the first number in parentheses is the population percentage, the second is the cases): Marin (4.44%; 7.49%), Mendocino (1.55%; 1.76%); and Lake (1.14%; 1.32%).  Five counties were “underrepresented” in the Court’s cases: Sonoma (8.51%; 4.44%); Solano (7.27%; 4.85%); Napa (2.4%; 0.44%) and Humboldt (2.37%; 1.76%).  The smallest county in the First District, Del Norte county, accounts for 0.5% of the total population, but the Court has not decided a single civil case from Del Norte since 1990.

Join us back here next week as we review the criminal docket for the First District.

Image courtesy of Flickr by David Sawyer (no changes).