Skip to content
Name: In re Cook
Case #: S240153
Court: CA Supreme Court
District CalSup
Opinion Date: 06/03/2019

A defendant entitled to a hearing under Penal Code sections 3051 and 4801 may seek the remedy of a Franklin proceeding, even if the offender's sentence is otherwise final. In 2007, Cook was sentenced to LWOP and five consecutive terms of 25 years to life for crimes committed when he was 17 years old. In 2014, Cook filed a habeas petition challenging his sentence as cruel and unusual punishment under the Eighth Amendment and Miller v. Alabama (2012) 567 U.S. 460. During Cook's habeas proceedings in the Court of Appeal, the court held (1) Cook's sentence was constitutional because…

View Full Summary
Name: People v. Berch
Case #: G055344
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 4 DCA
Division: 3
Opinion Date: 12/05/2018

In the absence of a stipulation by the parties, a commissioner is not authorized to conduct parole revocation hearings. The Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation petitioned for revocation of Berch's parole based on a number of allegations that he failed to participate in various treatment programs and that he failed to charge his GPS device as instructed. At the preliminary hearing for his parole revocation matter, Berch refused to stipulate to a commissioner hearing the matter. The preliminary hearing proceeded over his objection. The commissioner found sufficient probable cause that Berch had violated the parole conditions and set a hearing…

View Full Summary
Name: People v. Johnson
Case #: A151559
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 1 DCA
Division: 2
Opinion Date: 12/06/2018

After defendant's postrelease community supervision (PRCS) was revoked and reinstated, the tolling provision of Penal Code section 1203.2, subdivision (a) did not authorize the automatic extension of defendant's PRCS period. In June 2014, Johnson was released from prison and placed on PRCS. His supervision was scheduled to end on June 16, 2017. Johnson's PRCS was revoked twice and reinstated. The probation department filed a third petition for revocation in February 2017 and the petition stated the expiration of supervision as "7/11/2017 (time tolled)." The 25-day difference from the previous expiration date was based on the 25 days Johnson spent…

View Full Summary
Name: People v. Neal
Case #: A153101
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 1 DCA
Division: 2
Opinion Date: 11/30/2018

Where defendant objected to probation officer assessing his ability to pay the cost of probation services, trial court erred in imposing probation supervision fee without first determining defendant's ability to pay. Neal was convicted of possession of a firearm by an ex-felon and placed on probation. At his sentencing hearing, he objected to the recommendation in the probation officer's sentencing report that he pay for the cost of probation services as determined by the probation officer, not to exceed $75 per month. The trial court declined to consider Neal's ability to pay or the amount to be paid, stating that…

View Full Summary
Name: People v. Cruz-Lopez
Case #: A152348
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 1 DCA
Division: 1
Opinion Date: 08/21/2018

A defendant who is on probation is still in constructive custody and may not move to vacate a guilty plea pursuant to Penal Code section 1473.7. In January 2014, defendant entered pleas in several cases, including a guilty plea to assault with a deadly weapon. During the plea proceedings, defendant was advised his pleas may result in deportation or exclusion from admission to the United States. Imposition of sentence was suspended and he was granted probation. Probation was revoked after he committed a new criminal offense. The trial court imposed a three-year sentence, execution suspended, and reinstated probation. In March…

View Full Summary
Name: People v. Eastman
Case #: H044458
District 6 DCA
Opinion Date: 08/23/2018

A court does not have discretion to impose a condition of probation requiring sex offender registration outside the parameters of Penal Code section 290 et seq. Defendant pleaded guilty to six counts of disorderly conduct (Pen. Code, § 647, subd. (j)(2)) and admitted allegations the acts were "committed . . . as a result of sexual compulsion and for purposes of sexual gratification." (Pen. Code § 290.006.) The probation department recommended defendant be ordered to register as a sex offender for at least the period of probation. The trial court agreed with the recommendation but believed it did not…

View Full Summary
Name: In re Edwards
Case #: B288086
District 2 DCA
Division: 5
Opinion Date: 09/07/2018

CDCR's regulations excluding nonviolent offenders serving a life sentence from early parole consideration under Proposition 57 are inconsistent with the voters' intentions and therefore must be repealed. In 1998, Edwards was convicted of nonviolent felonies and sentenced to 53 years to life under the Three Strikes law. After the enactment of Proposition 57 in 2016, Edwards filed a habeas petition challenging regulations that CDCR promulgated, initially on an emergency basis, that made him ineligible for early parole consideration under Proposition 57 even though he was convicted of nonviolent felonies. Held: Petition granted. Proposition 57 added a provision to the California…

View Full Summary
Name: People v. Nuno
Case #: D072152
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 4 DCA
Division: 1
Opinion Date: 08/13/2018

Defendant who was convicted of leaving the scene of an injury accident was not ineligible for probation under Penal Code section 1203, subdivision (e)(4) because he did not use or attempt to use a deadly weapon in connection with his flight. Nuno had a loud, contentious dispute with his auto mechanic over shoddy workmanship on his truck. As he left the repair shop, he ran over the mechanic's leg, injuring him. He fled the scene. He drove for two minutes and then reported the accident to police. He was convicted of felony leaving the scene of an accident (Veh. Code,…

View Full Summary
Name: In re Williams
Case #: B286241
District 2 DCA
Division: 2
Opinion Date: 06/20/2018

A youth offender granted parole under Penal Code section 3051 is not required to serve a consecutive sentence for an in-prison offense committed after age 25. In 1991, at age 21, Williams was convicted of first degree murder and was sentenced to 28 years to life. At age 26, he committed an in-prison battery, for which he was sentenced to an additional 8-year consecutive sentence. Williams was found suitable for parole in 2016, but the state held him to serve additional time for the in-prison offense. He filed a petition for writ of habeas corpus, arguing…

View Full Summary
Name: In re Poole
Case #: A152341
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 1 DCA
Division: 2
Opinion Date: 06/22/2018

Board of Parole Hearing's denial of parole vacated where record reflects no support for Board's finding that defendant had no insight into his crime and therefore posed a threat to public safety. In 1988, Poole was convicted of second degree murder and sentenced to 20 years to life for a shooting he committed when he was 19 years old. The Board of Parole Hearings denied parole in April 2017, concluding that Poole lacked insight into the reasons for his crime, which was contrary to the opinions of the psychologists who assessed him in 2010, 2015, and 2017. Poole petitioned for…

View Full Summary