Habeas - Prop. 66

Name: In re Tuilaepa
Case #: B310753
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 2 DCA
Division: 7
Opinion Date: 02/24/2025

Order to show cause issued in capital habeas proceeding. In non-capital holdings: (1) at the prima facie habeas stage, the trial court erred by “weighing” facts in defense experts’ declarations against rest of record and also “assessing the credibility” of the declarations; (2) the trial court’s legal errors did not suggest judicial bias requiring CCP 170.1 disqualification on remand.

The full opinion is available on the court’s website here:

View Full Summary
Name: In re Maury
Case #: C095050
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 3 DCA
Opinion Date: 10/02/2024

Constructive deprivation of counsel under McCoy v. Louisiana (2018) 584 U.S. 414, was not implicated in capital case where defense counsel presented mitigating evidence at the penalty phase over defendant’s express objection. Defendant claimed that counsel's presentation during the penalty phase of certain mitigating evidence as a “cry for help” amounted to an admission of guilt in violation of the Sixth Amendment right to counsel as articulated in McCoy. Although the strategy was contrary to defendant's stated objective of obtaining a death verdict, the jury could have at most inferred consciousness of guilt from the evidence, which…

View Full Summary
Name: In re Duong (2024) 99 Cal.App.5th 273
Case #: B325525
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 2 DCA
Division: 1
Opinion Date: 01/29/2024

Defendant whose death sentence was reduced to LWOP during habeas proceedings was not entitled to appeal the order denying part of his habeas petition under Proposition 66. A jury convicted Duong of multiple murders and the trial court imposed a death sentence. His conviction and sentence were affirmed on direct appeal. During habeas proceedings in the trial court, Duong and the district attorney stipulated to granting in part and denying in part his habeas petition. The trial court accepted the stipulation, vacated Duong’s death sentence, and resentenced him to LWOP. Duong appealed the order to the Court of Appeal based…

View Full Summary
Name: Jimenez v. Superior Court (People)
Case #: B297595
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 2 DCA
Division: 4
Citation: 40 Cal.App.5th 824
Opinion Date: 10/02/2019

A discovery order in habeas proceedings following an order to show cause may exceed the scope of the criminal discovery scheme, but qualified attorney work-product protection applies to discovery beyond that scope. In his petition for writ of habeas corpus, petitioner (a death-row inmate) argued the jury impermissibly considered at least one alternate juror's opinion in deciding guilt. The California Supreme Court issued an order to show cause in the respondent superior court. On the district attorney's motion, the superior court ordered petitioner to produce the statements of any alternate jurors he had interviewed. Petitioner sought a writ of mandate…

View Full Summary
Name: In re Robinson
Case #: B293216
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 2 DCA
Division: 2
Citation: 35 Cal.App.5th 421
Opinion Date: 05/16/2019

Proposition 66 applies to habeas petitions filed before Proposition 66's enactment and pending on Proposition 66's effective date (October 25, 2017). In 1999, defendant was sentenced to death. In 2006, he filed a habeas petition in the California Supreme Court. In 2014, the Supreme Court issued an order to show cause why habeas relief should not be granted on three claims of juror misconduct. In 2015, the Court issued two orders referring the claims to the superior court for an evidentiary hearing and to issue a report and recommendation to the Supreme Court on how to resolve…

View Full Summary