Holy Cow! New Case Today: Stamps doesn’t apply to SB 136 !

Hot out of the First District today. Stamps does not apply to SB 136… meaning that if someone would otherwise be eligible to have his 667.5(b) priors stricken under SB 136, they must be stricken irrespective of if they were imposed as part of a plea bargain. I sort of assumed that because of StampsContinue reading “Holy Cow! New Case Today: Stamps doesn’t apply to SB 136 !”

new law capping misdo probation at 1 year applies retroactively to nonfinal cases!!

“We hold here that amendments to Penal Code section 1203a, which generally limit themaximum length of probationary terms for misdemeanor offenses to one year, applyretroactively, to a case which will not become final on appeal as of the January 1, 2021effective date of the statute.” People v. Burton (Dec. 12, 2020)

I’M SORRY 3 REVERSALS WAIT WHAT?!

(1) straight outta the 2nd reversed denial of romero and anyway the sentence was cruel and unusual under california constitution … so so so much good languagein this won [sic intended]: “For these reasons, no reasonable person could agree thatthe sentence imposed on Avila was just. Avila’s prior strikeswere remote and committed when he wasContinue reading “I’M SORRY 3 REVERSALS WAIT WHAT?!”

A nice one 6th district; finality and retroactivity for transportation of some weed

Well isn’t this pretty. Sixth District (way to go Lori Quick of SDAP), held yesterday in Lopez, H046618, that if someone is on probation that means his case is not “final” for purposes of retroactivity of an ameliorative law…i.e. he gets the benefit of the new law. This one was for transportation of weed, convictionContinue reading “A nice one 6th district; finality and retroactivity for transportation of some weed”

4th District busy bumble bees one is good, one is so so, and last one stings

Fourth district issued a great opinion today (People v. Barton, D072639) on erroneously dismissing a juror for refusing to deliberate. Reversed. REALLY thorough discussion about how the abuse of discretion standard for this issue is a little different and involves less deference than normal. Meanwhile, they ordered the trial court in another case (People v.Continue reading “4th District busy bumble bees one is good, one is so so, and last one stings”

Please do not “in this county me”

This just in. There is no principle of law that says the state or federal constitution, or the penal or evidence code, do not apply because “in this county” we don’t follow that law. I’ve heard this re timely discovery, I’ve heard this re diversion, I’ve heard this re discretion. Sorry, that’s not a thing.Continue reading “Please do not “in this county me””