Skip to content
Name: People v. Shkrabak (2023) 89 Cal.App.5th 943
Case #: C096266
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 3 DCA
Opinion Date: 03/28/2023

Under equal protection principles, defendant is entitled to custody credits for time spent in state hospital after the trial court found him incompetent to stand trial. On appeal, defendant requested a recalculation of his custody credit to include time spent in state hospital receiving competency treatment. Held: Remanded for recalculation of credits. Penal Code section 4019 provides that defendants confined in specific facilities and in various settings may earn conduct credit. In 2018, Senate Bill No. 1187 amended section 4019 to allow defendants receiving competency treatment in county jail treatment facilities, but not in state hospitals, to receive conduct credit.…

View Full Summary
Name: People v. Bolanos
Case #: F082970
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 5 DCA
Opinion Date: 01/26/2023

The youthful offender parole scheme under Penal Code section 3051 does not, on its face, violate equal protection. Appellant was 22 years old when he committed various sex crimes for which he was sentenced to serve two LWOP terms and multiple terms of life in prison with parole terms under the One Strike law. He appealed. Held: Remanded for resentencing in unpublished portion. First, appellant contended that the youthful offender parole scheme violated equal protection. A youth offender parole hearing is a hearing to review the parole suitability of any prisoner who was 25 years of age or younger at…

View Full Summary
Name: People v. Ngo (2023) 89 Cal.App.5th 116
Case #: E078723
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 4 DCA
Division: 2
Opinion Date: 03/10/2023

Penal Code section 3051 does not violate equal protection because there is a rational basis for excluding youthful offenders sentenced to LWOP from youthful offender parole hearings. Ngo, at the age of 19, was convicted of first degree murder, with a financial gain special circumstance and a firearm enhancement. He was sentenced to LWOP, plus 25 years-to-life. Ngo subsequently filed a motion for a Franklin hearing, requesting to preserve evidence of youth-related mitigating factors for purposes of a future youthful offender parole hearing pursuant to section 3051, which was denied due to his ineligibility as a result of his LWOP…

View Full Summary
Name: People v. McClure
Case #: H048280
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 6 DCA
Opinion Date: 08/17/2021

Penal Code section 1170.95 does not apply to individuals charged with murder but convicted by plea of voluntary manslaughter. In 2016, McClure was initially charged with deliberate and premeditated murder for her participation in events leading to the victim's death. She pleaded no contest to voluntary manslaughter and related charges, and admitted a great bodily injury allegation, in exchange for a stipulated 25-year sentence. In 2020, McClure petitioned for resentencing pursuant to section 1170.95. After appointment of counsel and argument, the trial court denied the petition, concluding a person convicted of voluntary manslaughter is ineligible for relief. McClure appealed. Held:…

View Full Summary
Name: Landau v. Superior Court
Case #: G056050
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 4 DCA
Division: 3
Opinion Date: 02/15/2019

Petitioner's motion to quash subpoena was properly denied because Sexually Violent Predator Act (SVPA) explicitly authorizes both parties to subpoena a sexually violent predator's otherwise confidential medical records. A jury found Landau to be a sexually violent predator (SVP) and the court ordered an indefinite commitment to the Department of State Hospitals. In advance of an evidentiary hearing/retrial, the district attorney served a subpoena duces tecum to obtain Landau's medical records, which Landau moved to quash. The trial court denied the motion. Landau filed a petition for a writ of mandate to challenge the denial. Held: Petition denied. Effective January…

View Full Summary
Name: People v. Munoz
Case #: B282323
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 2 DCA
Division: 1
Opinion Date: 01/10/2019

Defendant was not entitled to an instruction on gross vehicular manslaughter while intoxicated as a lesser included offense (LIO) of a Watson murder under the accusatory pleading test. Munoz, while driving under the influence of alcohol, collided with another car, killing its passenger and injuring the driver. He had a prior DUI conviction and attended classes on the dangers of driving while intoxicated. He was charged with implied malice "Watson" second degree murder (People v. Watson (1981) 30 Cal.3d 290) and convicted. On appeal, he challenged the trial court's refusal to instruct on vehicular and involuntary manslaughter as LIOs…

View Full Summary
Name: People v. Garcia
Case #: B269836
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 2 DCA
Division: 6
Opinion Date: 12/17/2018

Defendant who was 17 years old when he committed multiple sexual offenses is entitled to a remand of his case for a new juvenile fitness hearing because after Proposition 57 the criteria changed to determine whether a minor is fit for juvenile court treatment. In 1995, when Garcia was 17 years old, he committed violent sexual offenses against multiple victims. After a juvenile court fitness hearing, he was transferred to criminal court, where he received a 94-years-to-life sentence. In 2012, Garcia sought resentencing based on a new line of cases holding a sentence which amounts to LWOP imposed on a…

View Full Summary
Name: People v. Bedrossian
Case #: A151917
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 1 DCA
Division: 3
Opinion Date: 02/27/2018

Penal Code section 851.8 does not violate due process by requiring the statute of limitations for a crime to lapse before a petition to be deemed factually innocent may be adjudicated. Bedrossian was arrested on suspicion of felony false imprisonment and misdemeanor battery. The district attorney declined to press charges, and Bedrossian successfully moved to have his arrest deemed a detention (Pen. Code, § 849.5). He also filed a petition pursuant to section 851.8 to be found factually innocent of all charges and to have the record of his arrest destroyed. The trial court denied the petition…

View Full Summary
Name: People v. Chatman
Case #: S237374
Court: CA Supreme Court
District CalSup
Opinion Date: 02/01/2018

Certificate of rehabilitation statute, which distinguishes between former state prisoners and former felony probationers with respect to eligibility, does not deny equal protection of the law. In 2001, Chatman pleaded guilty to robbery and was placed on probation. Two years later, he was convicted of an alcohol-related driving offense. He later had both convictions dismissed (Pen. Code, § 1203.4). In 2008 he was convicted of a misdemeanor and spent 10 days in jail. In order to obtain licensing for a job, Chatman sought a certificate of rehabilitation (Pen. Code, § 4852.01). The trial court denied relief because he was a…

View Full Summary
Name: People v. Zamudio
Case #: B271406
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 2 DCA
Division: 7
Opinion Date: 05/15/2017

A petition to revoke parole filed by the district attorney need not include a report detailing why intermediate sanctions are inappropriate, as is required of the supervising parole agency. Zamudio was convicted of making a criminal threat (Pen. Code, § 422) and sentenced to state prison. In April 2014, he was released on parole. The district attorney sought to revoke his parole (Pen. Code, § 1203.2) after he assaulted a woman. Zamudio demurred to the petition because it failed to include a written report as to why intermediate sanctions without court intervention were inappropriate, as is required in petitions filed…

View Full Summary