The Court of Appeal remands for SB 567 resentencing, finding that although the trial court relied on defendant’s prior convictions to impose the upper term, it also cited aggravating factors that were neither stipulated to by defendant nor found true by the jury beyond a reasonable doubt. The court adopts the two-step harmless error standard identified in People v. Lopez (2022) 78 Cal.App.5th 459 and finds it cannot conclude, to the degree required by Watson, that the trial court “would have exercised its discretion in the same way” in the face of SB 567’s new mid-term presumption.
A163242
- December 28, 2022
- Division: Three
- Attorney: Lillian Hamrick
- Categories: Criminal, Sentencing
A164844
- December 23, 2022
- Division: Four
- Attorney: Paul Swiller
- Categories: Dependency, Disposition, ICWA
In an appeal from jurisdiction/disposition, the Court found the juvenile court failed to ensure the Agency fulfilled its duty of inquiry under the ICWA and there was not substantial evidence supporting the court’s finding the ICWA did not apply. The matter was conditionally reversed for compliance with the ICWA.
A162634
- December 23, 2022
- Division: Five
- Attorney: Lauren Dodge
- Categories: Criminal, Sentencing
The Court of Appeal vacates the trial court’s denial of defendant’s PC 1172.6 resentencing petition, finding that, although the evidence would otherwise have been sufficient to support the court’s reckless indifference and major participant findings, “the totality of circumstances necessarily includes the defendant’s youthful age, which the record does not indicate the court considered.”
A163272
- December 22, 2022
- Division: Five
- Attorney: Elizabeth Klippi
- Categories: Dependency, Jurisdiction
[Published Opinion] In an appeal from jurisdiction and disposition, the Court of Appeal found the juvenile court violated mother’s due process rights when it established jurisdiction based on the conduct of a parent the Department never alleged was an offending parent and on a factual and legal theory not raised in the Department’s petition.
A156558
- December 21, 2022
- Attorney: Elizabeth Garfinkle
- Categories: Criminal, Sentencing
The Court of Appeal held that appellant’s two, one-year prior prison term enhancements (Pen. Code, § 667.5(b)) must be stricken because neither was for a sexually violent offense. The Court further held that appellant must be resentenced in light of Assembly Bills 567 and 518.
A164684
- December 21, 2022
- Division: Three
- Attorney: Keith Fox
- Categories: Criminal, Delinquency, Probation, Parole, PRCS, and Mandatory Supervision
The Court of Appeal held that the electronic search condition and the condition prohibiting the use of encrypted data, files, disks or volumes were unreasonable under Lent where there was no relationship between appellant’s crimes and his use of electronic devices, social media, or encrypted data. The Court further held that the conditions prohibiting in-person and internet contact with minors or persons appellant believes to be minors were unconstitutionally overbroad. Specifically, the Court reasoned that while there was a compelling state interest in preventing appellant from committing further sexual assaults against minors, the no-contact conditions were not narrowly tailored in that they exposed the minor to possible probation violations for interactions that – especially give his young age – are a frequent part of life.
A161927 & 162077
- December 16, 2022
- Division: Two
- Attorney: Barry Karl & Robert Angres
- Categories: Criminal, Retroactivity of Changes in Law, Sufficiency of the Evidence
In this consolidated appeal, the Court of Appeal held that Assembly Bill 333 applies retroactively to Penal Code section 186.22(b)(1) (gang enhancement). (People v. Tran (2022) 13 Cal.5th 1169.) The Court further held that the amended definitions of “criminal street gang” and “pattern of criminal gang activity” in A.B. 333 apply retroactively to Penal Code section 182.5 (gang conspiracy). The Court, therefore, reversed appellants’ convictions and remanded the matter to allow the prosecution the opportunity to elect whether to retry appellants under current law.
A163739
- December 16, 2022
- Division: Four
- Attorney: Waldermar Halka
- Categories: Criminal, Pleading and Proof
The Court of Appeal struck the two 5-year sentence enhancements imposed under Penal Code section 667, subdivision (a) because they were not pled in the first amended complaint.
A162572
- December 16, 2022
- Division: One
- Attorney: Robert Bryzman
- Categories: Criminal, Sentencing
The Court of Appeal remanded for resentencing in light of recent amendments to Penal Code section 1170 (Senate Bill No. 567 (2021-2022 Reg. Sess.) and Assembly Bill No. 124 (2021-2022 Reg. Sess.)), which, among other things, created a presumption in favor of the low term where the defendant experienced psychological, physical, or childhood trauma and those factors contributed to the commission of the offense.
A163563
- December 16, 2022
- Division: Five
- Attorney: Elizabeth Grayson
- Categories: Criminal, Probation, Parole, PRCS, and Mandatory Supervision
The Court of Appeal held that the juvenile court lacked authority to impose probation conditions, including an electronics search condition, after committing the minor to the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation, Division of Juvenile Justice.