Case # | Name | Category | Court | Judge | Published |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
A167703
|
People v. Koontzy
Restitution order imposed as condition of probation rather than to directly address the victim's loss could not be modified after the criminal defendant's probation ended. |
Remedies, Criminal Law and Procedure |
|
M. Simons | Apr. 29, 2024 |
B323640
|
People v. Cunningham
Trial court correctly denied defendant relief under Penal Code Section 1172.6 (felony murder resentencing), which does not encompass the "provocative act" theory of murder. |
Criminal Law and Procedure |
|
K. Yegan | Apr. 25, 2024 |
S273797
|
People v. Reynoza
A conviction under Penal Code Section 136.1(b)(2) may not be based solely on proof that a defendant dissuaded an individual from "assisting in the prosecution" of an already-filed charging document. |
Criminal Law and Procedure |
|
P. Guerrero | Apr. 23, 2024 |
A166580
|
People v. Basica
Trial court's entry of summary judgment against surety and bail bond agent was proper when their charge failed to appear within the bond's exoneration period. |
Criminal Law and Procedure |
|
C. Smiley | Apr. 23, 2024 |
G062075
|
People v. Lezama
Criminal defendant who pled guilty to voluntary manslaughter after imputed malice theory of murder had been statutorily eliminated was ineligible for ameliorative resentencing relief provided by Penal Code Section 1172.6. |
Criminal Law and Procedure |
|
T. Delaney | Apr. 23, 2024 |
F085699
|
Modification: People v. Gray
Where defendant was found not guilty by reason of insanity, superior court lacked jurisdiction to modify and recalculate defendant' s commitment term pursuant to Penal Code Section 1172.75. |
Criminal Law and Procedure |
|
M. Snauffer | Apr. 19, 2024 |
A166001
|
Modification: People v. Beaudreaux
While the trial court erred in not providing counsel to defendant for his Section 1172.6 resentencing petition, the error was harmless because the jury found him to be the actual killer. |
Criminal Law and Procedure |
|
J. Streeter | Apr. 19, 2024 |
22-50045
|
U.S. v. Ramirez
Police officer's inquiry about a driver's parole status during a traffic stop was a neglibly burdensome safety precaution that did not violate the Fourth Amendment. |
Criminal Law and Procedure |
|
K. Lee | Apr. 19, 2024 |
22-7386
|
McIntosh v. U.S.
A district court's failure to comply with Fed. R. of Crim. Pro. 32.22(b)(2)(B)'s requirement to enter a preliminary order before sentencing does not bar a judge from ordering forfeiture at sentencing. |
Criminal Law and Procedure |
|
S. Sotomayor | Apr. 18, 2024 |
22-50262
|
U.S. v. Payne
Officer's use of parolee's thumb to access his cell phone information did not violate Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination. |
Criminal Law and Procedure |
|
R. Tallman | Apr. 18, 2024 |
D081050
|
People v. Barooshian
Defendant's double jeopardy was not violated because gross vehicular manslaughter while intoxicated was not a necessarily included offense of murder. |
Criminal Law and Procedure |
|
R. Huffman | Apr. 17, 2024 |
23-705
|
U.S. v. Medina-Luna
Since defects in an indictment are nonjurisdictional, criminal defendant's subsequent unconditional guilty plea was also a waiver of the right to appeal any error in procuring the indictment waiver. |
Criminal Law and Procedure |
|
S. Graber | Apr. 15, 2024 |
E082085
|
People v. Lewis
Gang member suffering from terminal ALS did not pose an unreasonable risk of danger under Penal Code Section 1172.2 because his illness made it difficult to walk and breath. |
Criminal Law and Procedure |
|
F. Menetrez | Apr. 12, 2024 |
21-50162
|
U.S. v. James Milheiser
Overbroad theory of fraud presented to jury required vacating criminal defendants' convictions for mail fraud because it did not require finding the deception concerned the essential nature of the bargain. |
Criminal Law and Procedure |
|
M. Friedland | Apr. 10, 2024 |
F084751
|
Modification: People v. Carrillo
Under Penal Code Section 1473.7, defendant, seeking to vacate conviction because he did not understand possible adverse immigration consequences, may include probation violation penalties as part of his "sentence." |
Criminal Law and Procedure |
|
D. Franson | Apr. 10, 2024 |
B324576
|
People v. Estrada
Trial court erred in denying defendant's petition for Penal Code Section 1172.6 resentencing because his pleas for attempted murder and voluntary manslaughter did not establish him as the actual killer. |
Criminal Law and Procedure |
|
V. Viramontes | Apr. 10, 2024 |
F085699
|
People v. Gray
Where defendant was found not guilty by reason of insanity, superior court lacked jurisdiction to modify and recalculate defendant' s commitment term pursuant to Penal Code Section 1172.75. |
Criminal Law and Procedure |
|
M. Snauffer | Apr. 8, 2024 |
B325200
|
People v. Uriostegui
Prosecution failed to demonstrate that presumptively invalid peremptory challenge to prospective juror based on her perceived lack of life experience was related to juror's ability to be fair and impartial. |
Criminal Law and Procedure |
|
H. Baltodano | Apr. 8, 2024 |
C099530
|
Mosley v. Superior Court (People)
Evidence recovered by warrantless automobile search should have been suppressed because totality of the circumstances did not support probable cause to believe that vehicle contained evidence of criminal wrongdoing. |
Criminal Law and Procedure |
|
J. Renner | Apr. 8, 2024 |
D081445
|
People v. Brown
Defendant's failure to bring a reconsideration motion was not dispositive because the ameliorative amendments to the mental health diversion statute occurred ten days prior to the hearing. |
Criminal Law and Procedure |
|
J. Kelety | Apr. 5, 2024 |
22-50240
|
U.S. v. Tat
Failing to challenge aspects of an initial sentence in a prior appeal did not result in waiver of right to challenge comparable aspects following de novo resentencing. |
Criminal Law and Procedure |
|
S. Mendoza | Apr. 5, 2024 |
21-30251
|
U.S. v. Sapalasan
Inventory search was lawful where officer kept seized backpack in his police vehicle while he responded to other calls and completed the search near the end of his shift. |
Criminal Law and Procedure |
|
R. Nelson | Apr. 2, 2024 |
A166001
|
People v. Beaudreaux
While the trial court erred in not providing counsel to defendant for his Section 1172.6 resentencing petition, the error was harmless because the jury found him to be the actual killer. |
Criminal Law and Procedure |
|
J. Streeter | Apr. 1, 2024 |
D082754
|
People v. Ayala
Trial court erred in admitting testimony of unavailable witness, who had been missing for over two years, but whom the prosecution did not begin searching for until two weeks before trial. |
Criminal Law and Procedure |
|
W. Dato | Apr. 1, 2024 |
F080361
|
People v. Rojas
Though Assembly Bill 333 required reversal of defendant's active gang participation conviction, jury's gang-murder special-circumstance finding under Penal Code Section 190.2 was affirmed because substantial evidence supported that finding. |
Criminal Law and Procedure |
|
C. Poochigian | Mar. 29, 2024 |
A169146
|
Modification: In re Seumanu
Because petitioner for habeas relief failed to adequately provide record materials and meet strict pleading requirements, all but one request for certificate of appealability was denied. |
Criminal Law and Procedure |
|
J. Streeter | Mar. 29, 2024 |
20-99011
|
Hart v. Broomfield
District court did not err in denying habeas relief, where California Supreme Court could have reasonably deemed potentially suppressed evidence immaterial. |
Criminal Law and Procedure |
|
H. Thomas | Mar. 29, 2024 |
A166011
|
People v. Serrano
There was sufficient evidence of premeditation and deliberation for attempted murder since defendant fired multiple gun shots at pursuing officers. |
Criminal Law and Procedure |
|
T. Jackson | Mar. 29, 2024 |
D081369
|
People v. McClelland
Court's ruling on 1172.6 petition after the parties agreed to submit the matter without a further evidentiary hearing did not violate defendant's due process rights. |
Criminal Law and Procedure |
|
J. Castillo | Mar. 28, 2024 |
B322561
|
People v. Hill
Denial of Section 1172.6 relief (felony murder amendment resentencing) does not implicate ex post facto principles. |
Criminal Law and Procedure |
|
E. Lui | Mar. 27, 2024 |