| advertise add site services publishers database health videos | ![]() | about toolbar stats live show health store more stuff JOIN/LOGIN |
- Maine Optometry, P. A. - Dr. Ronald M.... maineoptometry.com | Dr. Ronald M. Pugh P.C. drronaldpugh.com | Ronald M. Friedman, M.D. || Cosmetic and Reconstructive Surgery plasticsurgerydallas.com |
Ronald Marc George (born March 11, 1940) is the current and 27th Chief Justice of California, where he heads the Supreme Court of California. Governor Pete Wilson elevated George to Chief Justice in March 1996 (confirmed and sworn in on May 1, 1996). He has a B.A. from Princeton University and a J.D. from Stanford Law School. George served as Associate Justice on the Supreme Court since September 1991.[1] He was retained by the electorate in November 1998, with 75.5% percent of the vote.[2] Prior to his appointment to the Supreme Court by Wilson, George had been appointed to the California Court of Appeal by Governor George Deukmejian in 1987, the Los Angeles Superior Court by Governor Edmund G. Brown, Jr. in 1977, and the Los Angeles Municipal Court by Governor Ronald Reagan in 1972. George presided over the trial of Hillside Strangler Angelo Buono in 1981, when he was a superior court judge. George was widely lauded for his extremely unusual decision to deny the motion by Los Angeles County District Attorney's office to dismiss all 10 counts of murder against Buono, although his unusual decision was speculated to be a result of his earlier decision to separate crucial counts of rape and sodomy, which in themselves would serve as evidence against the accused, from the murder charges. The prosecutors felt the evidence against Buono was so weak that it did not justify even an attempt to win at trial. Although judges rarely second guess the prosecutors' judgment on such a matter (and George noted his own reservations about doing so in making his decision), George's review of the evidence in the case caused him to feel so strongly that the prosecutors were in error that he did exactly that. George reassigned the case to the California Attorney General's office, and that office successfully convicted Buono on nine of the 10 counts. Thus, it was recognized that the judge, through his bold action to deny the earlier motion to dismiss, had ultimately prevented a serial killer from going free. George is occasionally floated as a candidate for justice of the United States Supreme Court as a conservative acceptable to Democrats. In fact, according to a July 13, 2005 article in the San Francisco Chronicle, Democratic United States Senator Barbara Boxer suggested George as a potential nominee for the seat on the Court vacated by Sandra Day O'Connor's resignation, describing both George and his fellow California Supreme Court justice, Kathryn Werdegar, as "Republicans who reflect the spirit of Sandra Day O'Connor's tenure – independent and nonideological.'" [edit] In re Marriage CasesMain article: In re Marriage Cases In November 2006, several parties petitioned the Supreme Court of California to review the decision of lower California courts regarding same-sex marriage in the state.[1] Despite prevailing in the Court of Appeal, then-Attorney General Bill Lockyer urged the Supreme Court to take up the case.[3] In December 2006, the Supreme Court voted unanimously to review all six cases and held oral argument on March 4, 2008, consolidating the cases as In re Marriage Cases.[4] On May 15, 2008 the Supreme Court (in a 4-3 ruling) struck down California's existing statutes limiting marriage to opposite-sex couples,[5] including a 1977 one-man, one-woman marriage law and a similar voter-approved 2000 law, effective in thirty days. The opinion, written by Chief Justice George, cited the court's 1948 decision that reversed the state's interracial marriages ban. It found that "equal respect and dignity" of marriage is a "basic civil right" that cannot be withheld from same-sex couples, that sexual orientation is a protected class like race and gender, and that any classification or discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation is subject to strict scrutiny under the Equal Protection Clause of the California State Constitution. Associate Justices Joyce L. Kennard, Kathryn M. Werdegar, and Carlos R. Moreno concurred.[6] It is the first state high court in the country to do so.[7] In the majority opinion, Justice Ronald George wrote:
[edit] External links
[edit] References
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ↑ top of page ↑ | about thumbshots |