Author: juicejusticeandcorgis

About Me: sociology, african american studies, chicano/a studies, critical race studies, and criminal law scholar. public school kid from kindergarten-J.D. Former public defender. Currently, a criminal defense attorney at a private crimlaw only firm. Court-appointed appellate attorney on the side. Published author in the Criminal Law Bulletin and California Defender. "I do it for the joy it brings, because I'm a joyful girl, because the world owes me nothing, and we owe each other the world." Why I started JJC: My PD buddy suggested it. And I was pissing off too many nonPD buddies on fb with my rants. What and who JJC is inspired by: public defenders I have worked for, with, and next to. my clients who have battled things no one should and are still here. innocence and guilt and everything in between. My coworkers, who fight just as hard as the PDs I love, for many of the same reasons. My husband who was once voted "most Christ like" (every Jewish girl's dream). My Corgi who loves everyone. The constitution. Tabloids. My mom, for giving me a voice. My dad, for teaching me what to say. My brother, for teaching me how to say it.

writing counterfeit check at grocery store is misdo shoplifting, not burglary

second district COA today: theft by false pretenses in a commercial store? don’t worry, prop 47 got you. lovely.

Test

test

Testing

test

Worst. Juror. Misconduct. Ever.

This is super super super old news but so crazy. Jurors in a murder trial consulted an ouji board which (who?) told them that d was guilty. They told other jurors at breakfast and then they convicted. Conviction reversed, retried, convicted again.

This sucks

Court: you know what? Imma Prop. 36 you and you get CTS not life. DA: no objection. Prison: see ya.

One month later, DA: my bad, you aren’t eligible under prop. 36 because of a prior gang enhancement that everyone thought was stricken. Court: sorry back to prison-25 to life.

Court of appeal: no problem. Collateral estoppel argument: rejected.

There are so many bad cases that say an illegal sentence cannot stand even if it means D gets a harsher sentence.

I feel like this is a due process issue. I’m sure there is a case that says it isn’t. It’s just that when something is unfair you know the issue is due process because that’s the catch all constitutional principle when you say wtf?!

I feel so so bad for this guy.