AB 1950: Can Judge Revoke Probation if It Ended?

Assembly Bill 1950 does apply retroactively and, as in the following case, made probation end before probation was revoked, so the judge’s imposition of a prison term suspended was reversed. To read more about this case, please click on the following link – AB 1950: Can Judge Revoke Probation if It Ended?

Senate Bill 620 Resentencing under People v Tirado

In People v. Tirado, the California Supreme Court held that a trial court judge had discretion to lower the amount of a firearm use enhancement under Penal Code § 12022.53. The following summary explains how this decision was applied by the Fourth Appellate District Court to a recent San Diego Superior Court case, finding that the trial court even had discretion to impose a firearm enhancement not even alleged under 12022.53. To read the case summary, please click on the following link – Senate Bill 620 Resentencing under People v Tirado.

AB 1950: Probation Length for 245(a)(4), Girlfriend

After AB 1950 became effective, the probation period for a 245(a)(4) conviction, when the underlying facts involved domestic violence, should be three years, not two years. While the plain text of the statute would suggest two years, the First Appellate District held it should be three years when considered and “harmonized with other related statutes to the extent possible.” To read more about the particular case wherein this ruling was made, please click on the following link – AB 1950: Probation Length for 245(a)(4), Girlfriend

Motion to Recuse and Disqualify a Civil Case by DA?

The Orange County District Attorney’s Office did not improperly evaluate corporate documents seized by subpoena in violation of the attorney work product and attorney client privilege, as the documents were referred to a third party attorney to prepare a privilege log to protect certain documents. Moreover, there was no conflict of interest meriting recusal from a parallel civil action because the criminal case was dismissed. To read more about this interesting issue, please click on the following link – Motion to Recuse and Disqualify a Civil Case by DA?

SB 567: When Can Judge Not Sentence to Low Term?

A torture spree lasting approximately 24 hours, including defendant breaking the victim’s cheek bone and spraying the victim multiple times with bear spray, after disabling her phone and demanding she withdraw $3,000 from her bank for him were sufficient facts to overcome SB 567’s presumption of a low term sentence, even when defendant had a history that seemed to qualify him otherwise for the low term under SB 567. To read more about this particular case, please click on the following link – SB 567: When Can Judge Not Sentence to Low Term?

SB 1437 Relief if Defendant Admits Premeditation?

When a defendant admits during sentencing that he acted with the shared intent to kill another (by specifically admitting that the murder was “premeditated, deliberate and intentional”), he is ineligible later for resentencing under Penal Code § 11726 (Senate Bill 1437). It was not a “stray comment,” as defendant claimed on appeal. To read more about this case, please click on the following link – SB 1437 Relief if Defendant Admits Premeditation?

What Must Be Shown in Civil Case Against Cops?

In the context of a federal civil rights actual against law enforcement for evidence suppression or presenting false evidence, causation may be shown if there was a reasonable probability that the result of the proceeding would have been different if the evidence had been disclosed or, in the case of false evidence, that the evidence was not admitted. To read more about the legal standards that must be met for a civil lawsuit against police or a district attorney’s office, please click on the following link – What Must Be Shown in Civil Case Against Cops?

Prisoner Rights and Rehabilitation Credits in Jail

There is no equal protection violation for a county jail not offering rehabilitation courses (with corresponding custody credits awarded if the inmate completes there), whereas an inmate in state prison has such courses available because taking such courses is not a fundamental right and did not involve a suspect class. To read more about a county jail inmate’s constitutional violation claims, please click on the following link – Prisoner Rights and Rehabilitation Credits in Jail

Is PC § 243(e)(1) a Crime Involving Moral Turpitude?

A noncitizen can enter a plea to a violation of Penal Code § 242 or Penal Code § 243(e)(1) without exposure to any adverse immigration consequences as long as the plea is entered with certain stipulations with the prosecutor that prevent the conviction from being used as a crime involving moral turpitude. To read how to do this, please click on the following link to read a short article – Is PC § 243(e)(1) a Crime Involving Moral Turpitude?

Assembly Bill 1950 – Does it Apply to 273.5, 191.5?

AB 1950’s provisions are arguably ambiguous as to whether certain crimes have specified probation lengths particularly Penal Code §§ 273.5(a), 243(e)(1) and even 242 with a victim that falls under the provisions of Family Code definition of family when there is no visible injury (which is common). The same can be true of Penal Code § 191.5 because statutorily, it does not reference Vehicle Code § 23152 or Vehicle Code § 23153. To read more about this developing area of AB 1950, please click on the following link – Assembly Bill 1950 – Does it Apply to 273.5, 191.5?