In re Moses - filed March 16, 2010,
Court of Appeal - First Appellate District, Division Two
Cite as A124814
SUMMARY: An inmate served 29 years of a 17-years-to-life prison term for second degree murder and had an exemplary prison record, and Governor’s asserted reasons for denying parole:
1) that the murder was "especially atrocious,"
2) that inmate had maintained claim of self-defense, and
3) that he "had a significant record of criminal violence"
The Governor's characterization are not supported by the evidence in the record, the inmate was entitled to release on parole.
DISPOSITION: The petition for writ of habeas corpus is granted. The Governor is hereby ordered to vacate his decision of June 23, 2008, which reversed the Board‘s July 2007 grant of parole. The Board‘s July 2007 grant of parole is reinstated. In the interests of justice, this opinion is made final as to this court seven days from the date of filing.
Full text http://www.metnews.com/sos.cgi?0310%2FA124814
Attorney Diane T. Letarte: LIFER Parole Hearings CALL *** 619-233-3688 ***. BLOG Focuses on the Law/News that impacts inmates with LIFE, long-term DSL (SB260 & 261, AB1308, 3X'er, LWOP) Suitability Hearings are governed mostly by Penal Code 3041, et seq. LAWRENCE and SHAPUTIS CA Supreme Court cases are 2008 Landmark cases. 3/4/13, In Re Vicks Reversed by CA Supreme. 2/22/16, Gilman v. Brown was reversed by the 9th Cir. Marsy's Law aka (prop 9, 89) remains Law. Butler reversed
Tuesday, March 16, 2010
Wednesday, March 3, 2010
Marsy's Law (Prop. 9) - where are we now?
There has been several cases contesting Marsy's Law (Prop. 9). One of the trail blazer case was Gilman et al. V. Schwarzenegger et al. it raised several issues.
Unfortunately, for most lifers, it’s still a wait and see for any Ex Post Facto arguments under Prop 9.
Current Status:
- The District Judge dismissed the Lifer's Due Process claim against Proposition 9.
A preliminary injunction (PI) was granted to the specifically named plaintiffs. The State appealed. An argument in the circuit Court is set for April 13, 2010 to argue who else the preliminary injunction will apply to vis-a-vis inmates. The Order certifying the matter as a class action is pending on the state’s appeal. There is currently no stay on the Preliminary Injunction. The is no briefing scheduled yet. Let's keep an eye on this one!
There is ongoing discovery and of course the original action is on going based on the Civil Rights Act of 1871 which can be found in Title 42, section 1983, hence the well known name of the"1983" civil lawsuit.
We are all hoping for a win in the appeal of the class certification. This would allow to move for an expansion of the preliminary injunction to all class members !
(See our prior 2009 "Proposition 9" posting in this Blog)
Federal Defender (Eastern District) in Gilman et al. V. Schwarzenegger et al. (CIV-S-05-830 LKK GHH)
Eastern District with the UC Davis Law School of Civil Rights Clinic (Section 1983)
Lead Federal Public Defender: Monica Knox email: Monica_knox@fd.org
===== Other interesting cases on Ex Post Facto issues ============
In Thomas v. Yates (E.D. Cal. No. 05-1198) The District Judge has scheduled an evidentiary hearing to determine whether the Governor's use of his reversal power under the 1988 initiative is Ex Post Facto when applied to Lifers whose offenses occurred before the date of enactment.
In Biggs v. Schwarzenegger (E.D. Cal. No. 07-470; 2009 WL 4048109) also in a challenge to the Governor's Parole power of Reversal, the Magistrate has granted the Lifer's motion for additional Discovery.
Unfortunately, for most lifers, it’s still a wait and see for any Ex Post Facto arguments under Prop 9.
Current Status:
- The District Judge dismissed the Lifer's Due Process claim against Proposition 9.
A preliminary injunction (PI) was granted to the specifically named plaintiffs. The State appealed. An argument in the circuit Court is set for April 13, 2010 to argue who else the preliminary injunction will apply to vis-a-vis inmates. The Order certifying the matter as a class action is pending on the state’s appeal. There is currently no stay on the Preliminary Injunction. The is no briefing scheduled yet. Let's keep an eye on this one!
There is ongoing discovery and of course the original action is on going based on the Civil Rights Act of 1871 which can be found in Title 42, section 1983, hence the well known name of the"1983" civil lawsuit.
We are all hoping for a win in the appeal of the class certification. This would allow to move for an expansion of the preliminary injunction to all class members !
(See our prior 2009 "Proposition 9" posting in this Blog)
Federal Defender (Eastern District) in Gilman et al. V. Schwarzenegger et al. (CIV-S-05-830 LKK GHH)
Eastern District with the UC Davis Law School of Civil Rights Clinic (Section 1983)
Lead Federal Public Defender: Monica Knox email: Monica_knox@fd.org
===== Other interesting cases on Ex Post Facto issues ============
In Thomas v. Yates (E.D. Cal. No. 05-1198) The District Judge has scheduled an evidentiary hearing to determine whether the Governor's use of his reversal power under the 1988 initiative is Ex Post Facto when applied to Lifers whose offenses occurred before the date of enactment.
In Biggs v. Schwarzenegger (E.D. Cal. No. 07-470; 2009 WL 4048109) also in a challenge to the Governor's Parole power of Reversal, the Magistrate has granted the Lifer's motion for additional Discovery.
Monday, February 1, 2010
260 Inmates released in San Diego - per Federal Court Order
California is under a federal court order to cut the number of inmates by 40,000 — from about 168,000 now — over several years to ease overcrowding and improve health care in the state’s 33 prisons.
The new Law took effect in January and had an immediate effect in San Diego County, where about 260 nonviolent offenders were released.
Statewide, corrections officials launched their plan to reduce the prison population by 6,500 inmates (this year's plan) and save the state more than $100 million over the next year. They said some of the revamped program’s elements will cut down on recidivism and allow parole agents to focus attention on more dangerous former convicts.
This is GREAT news..... EXCEPT that the LIFER inmate population will not be affected by this reduction. In addition, Non-Lifer Inmates jailed for serious or violent crimes, including burglaries, robberies and sexual assault will also be disqualified for release.
see Full news story
http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/2010/jan/26/inmates-released-under-new-law/
The new Law took effect in January and had an immediate effect in San Diego County, where about 260 nonviolent offenders were released.
Statewide, corrections officials launched their plan to reduce the prison population by 6,500 inmates (this year's plan) and save the state more than $100 million over the next year. They said some of the revamped program’s elements will cut down on recidivism and allow parole agents to focus attention on more dangerous former convicts.
This is GREAT news..... EXCEPT that the LIFER inmate population will not be affected by this reduction. In addition, Non-Lifer Inmates jailed for serious or violent crimes, including burglaries, robberies and sexual assault will also be disqualified for release.
see Full news story
http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/2010/jan/26/inmates-released-under-new-law/
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)