Skip to content
Name: In re Guice
Case #: H047989
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 6 DCA
Opinion Date: 07/21/2021

Proposition 57 does not require nonviolent early parole consideration for mixed-offense inmates who are currently convicted of both nonviolent and violent felony offenses and are currently serving a term for a violent felony offense. Petitioner Guice is an inmate serving a sentence for multiple counts related to possession of controlled substances and robbery. Guice argued he is entitled to early parole consideration under Proposition 57 because his primary offense is nonviolent. In 2018, CDCR denied Guice's request for nonviolent parole consideration because he did not qualify as a nonviolent offender under California Code of Regulations, title 15, section…

View Full Summary
Name: People v. Schultz
Case #: F080978
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 5 DCA
Opinion Date: 07/20/2021

Assembly Bill No. 1950 applies retroactively to reduce the maximum term of probation in cases not yet final, unless the defendant's conviction comes within an exception set forth in Penal Code section 1203.1. Schultz entered a plea to driving under the influence causing injuries. (Veh. Code, § 23153, subds. (a) & (b).). At sentencing, the trial court suspended imposition of sentence for a period of five years, placed Schultz on probation, and ordered him to serve five months in local custody. On appeal, he argued the probation term should be reduced to two years based on a change in the…

View Full Summary
Name: People v. El
Case #: C091339
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 3 DCA
Opinion Date: 06/01/2021

When defendant declined offer of probation, the trial court was not required to impose the maximum term of punishment and had discretion to impose a lesser term. Following defendant's conviction for misdemeanor driving on a suspended license (Veh. Code, § 14601.1, subd. (a)), the trial court indicated it would place him on three years' informal probation. When defendant did not consent to probation, the trial court offered to reduce the probationary term to one year, advising defendant that if he did not accept probation the court was required to impose the maximum sentence of six months in jail.…

View Full Summary
Name: In re Ontiveros
Case #: D077905
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 4 DCA
Division: 1
Opinion Date: 06/21/2021

An inmate is not entitled to early parole consideration under Proposition 57 if he was convicted of both violent and nonviolent felonies. In 2017, Ontiveros was convicted of multiple felonies, including assault with a deadly weapon with gang enhancements and robbery, both of which are violent felonies. Ontiveros requested early parole consideration under Proposition 57, which provides that any person convicted of a nonviolent felony offense and sentenced to state prison shall be eligible for parole consideration after completing the full term for his primary offense. CDCR denied his request. The trial court denied Ontiveros' petition for writ of habeas…

View Full Summary
Name: People v. Ruggerio
Case #: B305655
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 2 DCA
Division: 6
Opinion Date: 06/25/2021

Where defendant was placed on probation and execution of the imposed state prison sentence was suspended, defendant was entitled to retroactive application of the ameliorative provisions of Senate Bill No. 136, but remand for reconsideration of the plea agreement was also required. Defendant was placed on probation in 2017, with a sentence of five years in state prison imposed but execution suspended, in keeping with the plea agreement fixing that sentence. In 2020, the defendant violated probation. The court revoked probation and ordered execution of the five-year sentence. Defendant moved to strike the one-year enhancement for a prior…

View Full Summary
Name: People v. Gonsalves
Case #: A159031
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 1 DCA
Division: 3
Opinion Date: 06/30/2021

Probation condition prohibiting defendant from associating with persons with a known "criminal record" is unconstitutionally vague and overbroad. A jury found defendant guilty of misdemeanor grand theft (Pen. Code, § 484e, subd. (d)) and felony fraudulent possession of personal information (Pen. Code, § 530.5, subd. (c)(3)). The trial court placed defendant on probation for three years and, as relevant here, imposed a probation condition forbidding him from associating with any persons known to him to have a "criminal record." Defendant appealed. Held: Probation condition reversed. The right of association is constitutional but "may be restricted…

View Full Summary
Name: In re Gadlin
Case #: S254599
Court: CA Supreme Court
District CalSup
Opinion Date: 12/28/2020

Opinion By: Chief Justice Cantil-Sakauye (unanimous decision)
CDCR regulation implementing Proposition 57 improperly excludes from nonviolent offender parole consideration defendants who are currently convicted of a nonviolent offense, but who must register as sex offenders. Gadlin was convicted of assault with a deadly weapon and sentenced as a third strike offender due to two prior registrable sex offenses. In 2016, voters approved Proposition 57 (adding Calif. Const., art. I, § 32) which expanded parole consideration to all state prisoners convicted of a nonviolent felony offense by rendering them eligible for parole after completion of the full term for the…

View Full Summary
Name: In re Palmer
Case #: S256149
Court: CA Supreme Court
District CalSup
Opinion Date: 01/28/2021

Opinion By: Justice Cuéllar (joined by Chief Justice Cantil-Sakauye and Justices Corrigan, Kruger, Groban, and Grover (Court of Appeal Justice). Justice Liu filed a concurring opinion.
The Court of Appeal erred in terminating petitioner's period of parole supervision solely based on its conclusion that petitioner had served an excessive prison sentence in violation of the state and federal Constitutions. In 1988, Palmer, then 17 years old, pleaded guilty to kidnapping for robbery and was sentenced to life imprisonment with the possibility of parole. He first sought release from the Board of Parole Hearings in 1995 but was denied. Following…

View Full Summary
Name: People v. McKenzie
Case #: S251333
Court: CA Supreme Court
District CalSup
Opinion Date: 02/27/2020

An ameliorative statute applies to all nonfinal cases, including those in which a defendant is placed on probation, with imposition of sentence suspended, and where no appeal is filed until after probation is revoked and sentence imposed. In 2014, defendant was convicted of drug crimes. Imposition of sentence was suspended and he was placed on probation. When his probation was revoked in 2016, his sentence included prior drug conviction enhancements (former Health & Saf. Code, § 11370.2). He appealed. The opinion in his case was filed in September 2017. Senate Bill No. 180, which eliminated the drug prior enhancement, was…

View Full Summary
Name: People v. Patton
Case #: D074344
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 4 DCA
Division: 1
Opinion Date: 11/06/2019

Appellate waiver did not prevent defendant from challenging electronic search condition on appeal without a certificate of probable cause. Defendant pleaded guilty to felony grand theft of personal property (Pen. Code, § 487, subd. (a)) after he and three others stole electronic devices, including three iPhones and two Apple watches, from a store. As part of the plea deal, defendant agreed to "give up my right to appeal . . . any sentence stipulated herein." The plea form stated, "As conditions of probation I may be given . . . conditions deemed reasonable by the Court." At…

View Full Summary