First District Court of Appeal Survey: Resuming In-Person Oral Argument
The California Court of Appeal, First Appellate District, has conducted all hearings remotely since the beginning of the pandemic. As the Court looks ahead to the post-pandemic reopening of its courtroom, and considers the timing and logistics for the transition to that reopening, the Court is seeking input from attorneys about the best way to move forward. The Clerk’s Office has drafted a survey designed to assist the Court in addressing these questions with the concerns and perspectives of attorneys in mind.
The Court would greatly appreciate it if attorneys could complete the survey, available here, no later than June 18, 2021. There are only 12 questions and it should take no longer than 5 minutes to complete. Please feel free to share the link with other colleagues and associates who practice in the First District.
Congratulations to FDAP Assistant Brad O’Connell for 35 Years at FDAP
In May of 1986, 35 years ago, FDAP Assistant Director Brad O’Connell joined the appellate project as a staff attorney. The staff feted/roasted Brad last month and we now invite you to join us in honoring Brad. Of our original 1986 crew, Brad is the only one remaining on staff and, thus, the first to reach the 35-year mark. But Brad’s contributions to our community and our work cannot be measured in years.
Having argued landmark cases in the Supreme Court of the United States and in the Supreme Court of California (among them Hedgpeth v. Pulido (2008) 555 U.S. 57 (erroneous theories of liability), People v. Randle (2005) 35 Cal.4th 987 (imperfect defense of others), People v. Buza (2018) 4 Cal.5th 658 (DNA arrestee searches), and People v. Duvall (1994) 9 Cal.4th 464 ( habeas standards)), and as counsel for countless indigent clients in the First Appellate District, Brad is a luminary of California’s indigent defense bar and appellate bar.
His knowledge of appellate practice, criminal law, and habeas law is unrivaled. As a testament to his brilliance, the Daily Journal editors selected Brad (along with FDAP Staff Attorney Richard Braucher) as a recipient of the 2021 California Lawyer Attorneys of the Year Award for Appellate Litigation, honoring him for work on behalf of inmates impacted by the COVID-19 outbreak at San Quentin State Prison. As the Daily Journal reported, “Strong advocacy for state inmates by” Brad and Richard “led to an unprecedented ruling in October as the coronavirus struck San Quentin hard along with other institutions run by the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation.”
To legions of FDAP staff attorneys, panel attorneys, and law clerks, Brad is a mentor, generous with his time and gracious in his tutelage. With humor and grace—not to mention his sonorous baritone—Brad has wowed, entertained, and edified audiences, whether they be attorneys attending an MCLE event or justices on the bench.
Above all, Brad is a consummate advocate, leaving no stone unturned for his indigent clients, uncovering legal error and injustices and crafting persuasive and compelling briefs. Congratulations Brad and thank you for your commitment to our clients, FDAP, and the practice of indigent defense!
Training Webinar: An Analysis of the Supreme Court’s Decision in In re Caden C.
On May 27, 2021, the California Supreme Court issued its opinion in In re Caden C., discussing the beneficial parent-child relationship. The issues on review were limited to the following:(1) what standard of review governs appellate review of the beneficial relationship exception to adoption? (2) Is a showing that a parent has made progress in addressing issues that led to dependency necessary to meet the beneficial parental relationship exception?
Join Leslie Barry, appellate counsel for mother, Christine C., on June 17, 2021 from 12 p.m. – 1 p.m. as she discusses the Court’s decision and its impact on families facing the termination of parental rights.
The training qualifies for 1.0 hours of general MCLE credit.
COVID-19 Extra Interim Claims Extended to End of Calendar Year, December 31, 2021
In Spring of 2020, the Judicial Council approved a temporary policy permitting additional interim claims to help ease the financial burden of COVID-19. As the original announcement stated, this policy was to run through December, 2020. The Judicial Council later extended the policy through the end of the fiscal year (June, 2021), and now has agreed that this policy will remain in place through the end of the calendar year, i.e. December 31, 2021.
For more information on the policy, please review the joint memorandum from the appellate projects and the “Are additional interim claims now permitted” FAQ on our COVID FDAP operations FAQ page.