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?

Life Sentence for Juvenile Affirmed, Youth Considered

While a judge must consider a youthful offender’s immaturity and still-developing judgment, a sentence of life without the possibility of parole may still be imposed as long as the judge finds “permanent incorrigibility” and does consider the youthful factors outlined in Miller v. Alabama. To read a summary of a recent Ninth Circuit case where this took place, please click on the following link – Life Sentence for Juvenile Affirmed, Youth Considered

Dismiss Gun Enhancement Per Special Directive 20-08?

George Gascon’s special directives instructing his district attorneys within Los Angeles County to dismiss sentencing enhancements was rejected by a Nowalk trial judge when a DA tried to dismiss certain enhancements. The defendant then made an equal protection argument all the way to the Supreme Court, which agreed that the denial of such a dismissal of enhancements was an equal protection violation. To read more about this interesting case, please click on the following link – Dismiss Gun Enhancement Per Special Directive 20-08?

SB 1437: Conviction for First Degree Murder Eligible?

A person who works as a “back up” or “security” for the actual killer in a first degree murder is ineligible for resentencing under Senate Bill 1437 under the new felony murder rule because the person had the intent to kill. To read a summary of a recent Compton case so holding that was affirmed on appeal to the Second Appellate District, please click on the following link – SB 1437: Conviction for First Degree Murder Eligible?

Excuse Juror Who Thinks Courts Treat Blacks Unfairly

It is not improper to dismiss a juror for his or her stated sympathy to an individual defendant because the juror could not be impartial, but it is improper to excuse a juror only if the juror states he or she believes our legal system is unfair to African Americans when the defendant is African American. To read a summary of a recent published decision addressing this thorny issue, please click on the following link – Excuse Juror Who Thinks Courts Treat Blacks Unfairly

Is No Television in Prison a Constitutional Violation?

Prison inmates do not have a constitutional right to have a personal television in their cells, rather than a shared television in only common areas. In this case, the Fourth Appellate District even pointed out that there is no constitutional right to even watch television. To review a summary of the recent published decision so holding, please click on the following link – Is No Television in Prison a Constitutional Violation?

Examples of Sufficient Prejudice for 1473.7 Motion.

A defendant alleging prejudicial error in a plea bargain, causing adverse immigration consequences, must show objective facts demonstrating actual prejudice by having accepted a plea bargain with such adverse consequences. This article lists examples of such objective facts showing actual prejudice. To read the article, please click on the following link – Examples of Sufficient Prejudice for 1473.7 Motion.

If Immigration Warning Says Conviction “May,” O.K.?

We like the following recently published decision (2022) from the Third Appellate District, as the summary could be any of hundreds of cases that followed the typical (and sad) entry of plea process, wherein the defendant accepted a plea to a deportable charge after being improperly told the conviction “may” result in deportation, etc. “May” is not certain enough, so it is improper. To read more about this 1473.7(a)(1) motion to vacate issue, please click on the following link – If Immigration Warning Says Conviction “May,” O.K.?