Skip to content
Name: Bonds v. Superior Court (2024) 99 Cal.App.5th 821
Case #: D082187
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 4 DCA
Division: 1
Opinion Date: 02/14/2024

When denying defendant’s motion for relief under the Racial Justice Act (RJA), the trial court erred by applying an incorrect legal standard that ignored that bias can be unconscious and implied as well as conscious and express. After a traffic stop, Bonds was charged with carrying a concealed firearm as a misdemeanor. He filed an RJA motion, arguing there are significant racial disparities in local policing, particularly with regard to the nature and frequency of traffic stops. At a hearing on the motion, Bonds offered the testimony of three expert witnesses and the police officer who stopped him. The officer…

View Full Summary
Name: Mosby v. Superior Court (2024) 99 Cal.App.5th 106
Case #: E080924
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 4 DCA
Division: 2
Opinion Date: 01/25/2024

To make a prima facie showing of discriminatory charging under the Racial Justice Act (RJA), the defendant must offer evidence that, if believed, would show both a racial disparity in charging in the county and that nonminority defendants who were similarly situated and engaged in similar conduct faced lower charges. Mosby was charged in Riverside County with capital murder. He filed motions under the RJA seeking to bar the prosecution from pursuing the death penalty based on racially discriminatory charging practices in the county. (Pen. Code, § 745(a)(3).)  The trial court ultimately rejected the RJA claim at the prima facie…

View Full Summary