In re Sanchez 10/1/12 - The inmate's denial of the "official story" is NOT minimizing his role - A big WIN for the Lifers!

 In re Sanchez , District: 4 DCA , Division: 3 , Case #: G046189
Date: 10/1/2012, DAR #: 13676


In Short: The BPH's conclusion that the inmate refused to acknowledge responsibility for the offense was Arbitrary. Thus, the Board of Parole Hearings (BPH) erred by finding that the inmate represents a current danger.

Case Holding:
The Board of Parole Hearings (BPH) erred by finding that the inmate represents a current danger based on discrepancies between the Court of Appeal's summary of the life offense and the inmate's account. In 1993 the inmate committed a gang-related driveby shooting that left a man paralyzed from the waist down. He was convicted of attempted murder and other charges and sentenced to a term that included life with possibility of parole. On several occasions since 2006 the BPH denied parole. Since then the inmate did well in custody and accepted responsibility for the life offense. He attended self help groups, job training, and educational programs.

The inmate filed a writ petition after the BPH denied parole in 2010. Held: Petition granted and case remanded for a new parole hearing. The BPH denied parole because the inmate minimized his role both in the life offense and in his gang in 1993, which reflected a criminal mentality. This, along with his unstable social history and the nature of the offense, posed a current danger.

These conclusions were reached by relying on the Court of Appeal opinion on direct review, finding the inmate's denial of the "official account" a shirking of responsibility for the offense and minimizing his gang status, which meant he lacked insight into his life crime. However, any inconsequential discrepancies between the inmate's version of events and the opinion did not reflect continuing dangerousness. Although credibility regarding the inmate’s version of events is for the BPH to determine, here, the denial of parole did not turn on a question of the inmate's credibility but "on the Board's mistaken enshrinement of an official version of the offense."

 The BPH therefore did not give meaningful review to the inmate's credibility or insight into the life crime and the conclusion that the inmate refused to acknowledge responsibility for the offense was therefore arbitrary.


Thank you to CCAP for their summary of In re Sanchez case.

LIFER Parole Hearing Denial & Filing Petition to Advance (PTA) - BPH1045(A)

On November 4, 2008, California voters were apparently swayed by emotion into passing Proposition 9,  the Victims’ Bill of Rights Act (“Act”). While the proposition’s title was admittedly appealing and evoked understandable sympathy for the silent and defenseless,  the Act’s actual language raises serious Constitutional questions. To cover up the Constitutional issues and the violation of the  Ex Post Facto legal Principle  Marsy's Law changed Penal Code 3041.5 to permit a life inmate to submit a written request to the Board of Parole Hearings (BPH), to advance his or her parole Suitability hearing to an earlier date, if there is changed circumstances or new information, after receiving the new 3 year to 15 year Denial range. (Compared to the pre-Prop 9 law allowing only for 1 year to 5 year denials).
 
Some of the major reasons that Marsy's  (Prop 9) Law has not been seen as an "issue" with the Court is becasue of the "safety valve" created by the Petition to Advance (PTA) the Parole hearing if s/he was denied.  Unfortunately, the Courts are not looking at the Statistics for the 94% DENYrate of these PTA. Maybe Lifers should send a message to the State Courts and start challenging the BPH 1045(A) process via a WRIT OF HABEAS COPRUS (WHC)!

If you need assistance with the preparation of the PTA please. See ATTORNEY DIANE T. LETARTE's website on the PTA at   http://www.dianeletarte.com/product/Legal%20Opinion-995_Attorney-Petition-to-Advance-Lifer-Parole-Hearing 

If you need assistance with a WHC: See:  http://www.dianeletarte.com/liferappeals . If you can not afford to hire an attorney then contact Keith or Gary (x-inmate and pioneers of the parole process) at the address below for potential guidance in your Pro Se efforts.

A big THANKS to ECC for the hard work in fighting for the LIFERs. Keith Chandler and Gary Eccher were able to get the BPH 1045(A) Petition grant rate statistics via the PUBLIC information Request from the BOARD OF PAROLE HEARINGS (BPH, aka the BOARD). ECC   Eccher & Chandler Consulting produce bi-monthly - ECC Newsletters.    Keith and Gary can be reached at:

ECC   Eccher & Chandler Consulting
532 N. MAGNOLIA AVE. #333,
ANAHEIM, CA 92801


STATISTICS SUMMARY:

During the period of January 1, 2009 to June 5, 2012  there were 637 petitions to advance hearing (BPH 1045 form) submitted. 513 were summarily denied. 124 were granted full review.  42 petitions were granted a new hearing out of the actual 637 petitions submitted. That means only 6% of the actual petitions submitted were granted a new Lifer Parole Suitability hearing. That means 94% were denied.

PRISON REALIGNMENT = Musical Chair..................... Where will the LIFERS fall?

In  October 2011, Governor Edmund G. Brown Jr. signed Assembly Bill (AB) 109 and AB 117, historic legislation that will enable California to close the revolving door of low-level inmates cycling in and out of state prisons. It is the cornerstone of California’s solution for reducing the number of inmates in the state’s 33 prison to 137.5 percent of design capacity by June 27, 2013, as ordered  by the Three-Judge Court and affirmed by the U.S. Supreme Court.

California state prisons began moving "non-non-non" (non-serious, non-sexual, non-violent) offenders into county jails, the county probation system and county courts. By this 2012 summer the number of former state prisoners was expected to reach 6,000 in county jails.

HOW DOES THIS IMPACT LIFERS - INDIRECTLY?  (see below)

The combined effects of realignment, reducing the numbers of low level offenders headed to state prisons, and the recently implemented reclassification system, enabling many inmates to be housed in lower security level prisons, is causing CDCR’s prison to prison transfer of inmates to wobble. SIDEBAR:  LIFER attorney DIANE T. LETARTE has been in the prisons constantly but lately, the CDCR Staff is very frustrated with all these new changes!   Be PATIENT  !!! 

In order to accommodate the rapidly increasing numbers of inmates able to be housed in Level II facilities (lowest level for LIFERs)  the department has announced a series of YARD conversions and even the CLOSURE of aging California Rehabilitation Center at Norco.

In August 2012, the first reception center conversions taking place is with Facility D at RJ Donovan becoming a Level III SNY yard and Facility F at SATF swapping to a Level II EOP (Extended Out Patient). High Desert reception center yard Facility A convert to a Level III general population in October.

In one of the two big changes Valley State Prison for Women in Chowchilla will become a men’s facility, probably a Level II SNY facility. Most of the women prisoners now at VSPW are expected to transfer across the road to California Correctional Women’s Facility, also located in Chowchilla. The conversion is expected to be gradual, with the prison holding both men and women for a brief time, the men housed exclusively most likely on AFacility. The complete conversion is expected to take up to two months, barring unexpected complications.

California Medical Facility in Vacaville, now a Level III, will become Level II security in October and CDCR apparently will use the remaining two months of 2012 to stabilize and finalize these changes, as no other yard changes are slated until the beginning of 2013.

In January, 2013 Old Folsom, now a Level III, is expected to become a Level II general population and California Training Facility-North will also drop from Level III SNYs to Level II in February, with Ironwood changing its Level IV SNY Facility A to a Level III SNY in March.

In April Centinela will move Level IV GP Facility C to a Level II GP and Deuel Vocational Institute in Tracy will convert four yards now designated Level III GP to Level II and the remaining three yards, now reception centers, will become Level II GP yards. And in May Alpine Section at San Quentin will move from reception center to Level II general population. It is also reported are that some institutions, including California Men’s Colony in San Luis Obispo and CIM at Chino will be designated as facilities for those prisoners with chronic, but not acute, medical issues with resulting transfer of prisoners from many facilities.

The CLOSURE of California Rehabilitation Center (Norco) will be completed by Fiscal Year 2015/16 for an estimated saving of $160 million annually in operations and an additional savings of more than $200 million in repairs that won’t be needed to the aging and expensive to repair wooden housing units, many not ADA (American Disability Act) accessible.


NOTE: The above prison information is mainly from the Life Support Alliance (LSA) July 2012 Newsletter. LSA can be contacted at 916-743-1654 or 916-402-3750.    Thank you   LSA!!!