Skip to content
Name: In re Koenig (2023) 97 Cal.App.5th 558
Case #: C098893
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 3 DCA
Opinion Date: 11/28/2023

Inmate convicted of both violent and nonviolent offenses is not entitled to early parole consideration under Proposition 57 because he is serving a term for the violent felonies throughout his aggregate term. In 2013, Koenig was sentenced to an aggregate prison term that included both nonviolent and violent offenses. After CDCR refused Koenig’s requests for a referral to the Parole Board for early parole consideration, he eventually filed a habeas petition in the Court of Appeal arguing that he is entitled to early parole consideration under Proposition 57 because he completed his full term of five years for his primary…

View Full Summary
Name: In re Hicks (2023) 97 Cal.App.5th 348
Case #: B319925
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 2 DCA
Division: 2
Opinion Date: 11/17/2023

Proposition 57 does not require early parole consideration for inmates convicted of both violent and nonviolent felonies, even where the primary offense is a nonviolent felony. Hicks is currently serving a sentence on two counts of burglary and one count of robbery. He is considered a “mixed-offense” inmate because he is convicted of both a nonviolent and violent felony. He sought early parole consideration under section 32(a)(1) of the California Constitution, asserting he should be eligible because his primary offense (burglary) is a nonviolent felony. After the Court of Appeal denied relief, the California Supreme Court issued an order to…

View Full Summary
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: 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: 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 Arroyo
Case #: G056020
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 4 DCA
Division: 3
Opinion Date: 06/25/2019

Proposition 57 addresses an inmate's eligibility for early parole consideration but does not dictate the timing of the actual parole suitability hearing. Arroyo was sentenced to an indeterminate sentence of 35 years to life under the Three Strikes law. He filed a habeas petition in superior court challenging CDCR regulations that, at the time, made three strike offenders serving an indeterminate sentence for a nonviolent offense ineligible for early parole consideration under Proposition 57. After his petition was denied, Arroyo filed a similar habeas petition in the Court of Appeal. An order to show cause issued.…

View Full Summary
Name: In re McGhee
Case #: A153721
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 1 DCA
Division: 4
Opinion Date: 04/29/2019

CDCR's screening and referral process for parole consideration by the Board of Parole Hearings, which excludes otherwise eligible inmates based on their in-prison conduct, is inconsistent with the California Constitution. Proposition 57 amended the California Constitution to provide that "[a]ny 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 or her primary offense." (Art. I, § 32, subd. (a)(1).) In carrying out its duty under Proposition 57 to adopt regulations, CDCR promulgated California Code of Regulations, title 15, section 3492, which provides that eligible…

View Full Summary