The Court of Appeal published only the introductory portion of the opinion to give context to a separate concurrence regarding RJA claims based on peremptory challenges. While the defendant’s habeas petition was pending in the Court of Appeal, the Supreme Court decided People v. Hazlett (2026) __ Cal.5th __ (S126387), which required the denial with prejudice of the portion of the defendant’s RJA claim based on the racially discriminatory use of peremptory challenges. 

Justice Streeter wrote a concurring opinion, noting he was required to concur, but expressing agreement with Justice Evans’ dissent in Hazlett, and adding historical context to give further perspective on whether the legislature intended and will now need to act to expressly include peremptory challenges under the scope of the RJA.

The full opinion is available on the court’s website here: https://www.courts.ca.gov/opinions/documents/A170412.PDF