Loading…
Standing Order 2007-0008 (effective September 21, 2007; a revision of Policy Order 94-1): the Superior Court Clerks may grant a one-time extension on a proof of completion, a proof of enrollment and an early reporting date - proof of completion of Community Service 30 days, proof of enrollment (ACCS) 60 days, proof of enrollment (Level 1 or SB38) 21 days, proof of enrollment (General) 20 days, and modification of a jail reporting date (early reporting date only) - the Clerk preparing a Minute Order requiring the defendant's signature and writing “Per Standing Order 2007-0008,” in the space for the Judges' signature.
California > Fifth Appellate District > Merced County > Superior Court of California, County of Merced
SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF MERCED SUPERIOR COURTS BUILDING 627 W. 21ST STREET MERCED, CALIFORNIA 95340 September 17, 2007 STANDING ORDER 2007-0008 Effective September 21, 2007 This Standing Order 2007-0008 is a revision of Policy Order 94-1 and shall replace said Policy Order. The Judges of the Superior Court hereby permit the Superior Court Clerks the authority to grant a one-time extension on a proof of completion, a proof of enrollment and early reporting date as follows: 1. Proof of completion of Community Service 30 days 2. Proof of enrollment (ACCS) 60 days 3. Proof of enrollment (Level 1 or SB38) 21 days 4. Proof of enrollment (General) 20 days 5. Modification of Jail Reporting Date (Early Reporting Date Only) Whenever the Clerk grants an extension as indicated above, a Minute Order shall be prepared requiring the defendant’s signature. In the space provided for the Judges’ signature, the clerk shall write the words “Per Standing Order 2007-0008,” followed by the Clerk’s name. JOHN D. KIRIHARA PRESIDING JUDGE OF THE SUPERIOR COURT
SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF MERCED SUPERIOR COURTS BUILDING 627 W. 21ST STREET MERCED, CALIFORNIA 95340 September 17, 2007 STANDING ORDER 2007-0008 Effective September 21, 2007 This Standing Order 2007-0008 is a revision of Policy Order 94-1 and shall replace said Policy Order. The Judges of the Superior Court hereby permit the Superior Court Clerks the authority to grant a one-time ext
Reviewer note: Transcribed 2026-10-15 (California T4 Merced build 2026-10-15) by eye from BenchPath custody ca/t4/ca-merced/docs/general/standing-order-07072026.pdf (11638206 bytes, sha256 3a64db27e5391b6e9054feb5caef786433c02e5204366a95c135937e05e1630f; the compilation “ACTIVE STANDING ORDERS 2006 to Present”, linked as “All Current Standing Orders”; 70 pages - 36 covered by scanned page images (each with a machine reading laid with it - not a card's source), 34 born-digital (one font of the juvenile competency protocol's pages draws its characters shifted)); this order the compilation's pages 5 and 6, scanned page images: read on the page images rendered at 200 dpi (vision/img/so-p05.png to so-p06.png), transcribed with the compilation's pages 4 to 17 and checked against a RapidOCR reading of the images (at 200 dpi) and the file's own text layer for the same pages, never published: of the transcription's 2207 words, 194 6-word windows were not found in a reading, in 24 spans - 20 spans split into consecutive pieces each found (a page break, a letterhead or signature block the readings interleave, or the readings' line order) and 4 spans read again on the page images and found as transcribed (vision/check-log.txt; evidence/vision-check-2026-10-15.log, evidence/vision-explain-2026-10-15.log). Not part of the text: the compilation's page stamps (“N of 70”) and, where printed, the court's seal, the letterhead's upper-right block, the signature, the running footers and the order's distribution list (cc:), never content (taken out by build/normalize_transcripts.py; the transcriber's file is kept in custody). The transcription's closing note, which describes the pages, is not published.
Standing order of the 109th Judicial District Court for every pending or later-filed case in Andrews, Winkler and Crane Counties: any attorney or self-represented litigant who uses any form of artificial intelligence for legal research or drafting in a case must, before using AI-generated information in a court submission or proceeding, sign and submit the court's certification form stating that all language, quotations, sources, citations, arguments and legal analysis created or contributed to by generative AI were verified as accurate by a human through traditional (non-AI) legal sources, and acknowledging responsibility and potential sanctions for their or their co-counsel's failure to comply. Effective immediately; in effect until rescinded or replaced.
Standing order of the 109th Judicial District Court for every pending or later-filed case in Andrews, Winkler and Crane Counties: any attorney or self-represented litigant who uses any form of artificial intelligence for legal research or drafting in a case must, before using AI-generated information in a court submission or proceeding, sign and submit the court's certification form stating that all language, quotations, sources, citations, arguments and legal analysis created or contributed to by generative AI were verified as accurate by a human through traditional (non-AI) legal sources, and acknowledging responsibility and potential sanctions for their or their co-counsel's failure to comply. Effective immediately; in effect until rescinded or replaced.