Areas of Constitutional Law (CA)

IAC for Failure to Investigate and Appellate Review of IAC Claim

(1) Did defense counsel render ineffective assistance by failing to consult a qualified expert on determining time of death and failing to present evidence regarding defendant's clothing around the time of the crime? (2) Did the decision of the Court of Appeal adhere to the controlling standards of appellate review? [Editor's Note: In 2015, the Supreme Court issued an order to…

Case: People v. Long (2020) 10 Cal.5th 764
Case Number: S249274
Updated: 20201130
Read more

Double Jeopardy

Did the Court of Appeal err by holding that double jeopardy prevents retrial of defendant for first degree murder where the jury did not return a verdict on that offense and deadlocked on the lesser included offenses of second degree murder and voluntary manslaughter, because the trial court failed to afford the jury an opportunity to return a partial acquittal…

Case: People v. Aranda (2019) 6 Cal.5th 1077
Case Number: S214116
Updated: 20190404
Read more

Constitutionality of Three Strikes Law–Requiring Prosecutors to Plead and Prove Prior Convictions

(1) Does the Three Strikes law (Pen. Code, §§ 667, subds. (b)-(i), 1170.12) violate the separation of powers doctrine by requiring prosecutors to plead and prove prior qualifying felony convictions? (2) If there is a duty to plead prior qualifying convictions, is mandamus the proper remedy to compel a prosecutor to act? Held: Dismissed as moot on 8/20/25.  

Case: The Association of Deputy District Attorneys v. Gascón (2022) 79 Cal.App.5th 503, review granted 8/31/2022
Case Number: S275478/B310845
Updated: 20250820
Read more

Appropriate Test for Determining Whether a “True Threat” is Unprotected By the First Amendment

Whether, to establish that a statement is a “true threat” unprotected by the First Amendment, the government must show that the speaker subjectively knew or intended the threatening nature of the statement, or whether it is enough to show that an objective “reasonable person” would regard the statement as a threat of violence. Held: True threats of violence are outside…

Case: Counterman v. Colorado (2023) 600 U.S. 66 [143 S.Ct. 2106]
Case Number: 22-138
Updated: 20230627
Read more

Finality for Ameliorative Change in Law When Judgment is Later Vacated, Altered, or Amended and a New Sentence Imposed

When a judgment becomes final, but is later vacated, altered, or amended and a new sentence imposed, is the case no longer final for the purpose of applying an intervening ameliorative change in the law? Proposition 57 applies to juvenile offender’s resentencing because his judgment became nonfinal when his original sentence was vacated during habeas proceedings and his case was…

Case: People v. Padilla (2022) 13 Cal.5th 152
Case Number: S263375
Updated: 20220526
Read more

Does the Double Jeopardy Clause Prohibit Second Prosecution for Crime of which Defendant Was Previously Acquitted?

The Georgia Supreme Court held that a jury’s verdict of acquittal on one criminal charge and its verdict of guilty on a different criminal charge arising from the same facts were logically and legally impossible to reconcile. It called the verdicts “repugnant,” vacated both of them, and subsequently held that the defendant could be prosecuted a second time on both…

Case: McElrath v. Georgia (2024) 601 U.S. 87 [144 S.Ct. 651]
Case Number: 22-721
Updated: 20240221
Read more

Does AB 333 Unconstitutionally Amend the Requirements for a True Finding on a Prior Strike Conviction and a Prior Serious Felony Conviction?

(1) Does Assembly Bill No. 333 amend the requirements for a true finding on a prior strike conviction (Pen. Code, §§ 667, subds. (b)–(i) & 1170.12, subds. (a)–(d)) and a prior serious felony conviction (Pen. Code, § 667, subd. (a)), or is that determination made on “the date of that prior conviction”? (See Pen. Code, §§ 667, subd. (d)(1) &…

Case: People v. Fletcher (2025) 18 Cal.5th 576
Case Number: S281282/E077553
Updated: 20250825
Read more

Does the prohibition on electronic recording of certain proceedings violate the CA Constitution when an official court reporter is unavailable?

This case presents the following issue: Does the prohibition on electronic recording of certain proceedings in Government Code section 69957, subdivision (a) violate the California Constitution when an official court reporter is unavailable and a litigant cannot afford to pay a private court reporter? Held: “[L]ike other mandatory statutes that 'do not themselves contain an exception for needy litigants,' courts…

Case: Family Violence Appellate Project v. Superior Court (2026) 20 Cal.5th __
Case Number: S288176
Updated: 20260810
Read more

What prejudice standard is required under the RJA?

The court vacated submission in this automatic appeal and directed the parties to file supplemental briefs addressing the following questions: (1) Once a violation of Penal Code section 745, subdivision (a)(2) is established on direct appeal, is an analysis for harmless error required under article VI, section 13 of the California Constitution before relief can be granted under Penal Code…

Case: People v. Demolle (2026) 19 Cal.5th 1117
Case Number: S159120
Updated: 20260601
Read more

Whether a court commissioner may perform a bail review hearing in PRCS revocation proceedings?

Is conducting a bail review hearing in post-release community supervision revocation proceedings one of the “subordinate judicial duties” (Cal. Const., art. VI, § 22) that a court commissioner is permitted to perform without a stipulation by the parties?

Case: Turcios v. Superior Court (Jan. 5, 2026, B343717) [nonpub. opn.], review granted 3/25/26 (S295195)
Case Number: S295195/B343717
Updated: 20260325
Read more