Court Opinion

ID: 9542866
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-07 16:39:39.793195+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T15:09:08.052174
License: Public Domain

WERDEGAR, J., Concurring.
I have signed the majority opinion. I write separately only to make clear that the opinion does not decide any question about the constitutionality of rule 29.5 of the California Rules of Court. The rule reflects the assumption that the California Constitution gives this court jurisdiction to answer certified questions. As the majority notes, some other states’ supreme courts have found themselves to possess similar powers under their own state constitutions. (Maj. opn., ante, at p. 361.) We do not today address the scope and limits of the provisions defining our own powers (Cal. Const., art. VI, §§ 10, 11, 12) because, as the majority also notes, the parties have not questioned rule 29.5’s validity.