caclr_header_template1 California Criminal Law Reporter

Recent Defense Victories

Defendant was entitled to a remand in order to make a record that will help at his youth offender parole hearing in 25 years. (816)
Defendant was convicted of the murder and attempted murder of rival gang members. He was 16 years old at the time of the incident and was sentenced to 40 years-to-life. The case was remanded so that defendant could make a record of information that will be relevant to his youth offender parole hearing in 25 years.
People v. Tran ____ Cal.App.5th ____, ____ Cal.Rptr.3d ____, 2018 D.A.R. 1564 (2nd Dist. 2018) February 15, 2018 (G053424)
Defendant was improperly convicted of five counts of robbery and another five counts along with an allegation based on the same five acts. (700)
Defendant was improperly convicted of five counts of residential robbery under Penal Code section 211 and another five counts of residential robbery along with an allegation that he acted in concert and entered an inhabited dwelling under section 213, subd.(a)(1)(A). The first five counts were necessarily included in the second five counts.
People v. Hutchinson ____ Cal.App.5th ____, ____ Cal.Rptr.3d ____, 2018 D.A.R. 1535 (2nd Dist. 2018) February 15, 2018 (B279767)
Amendment to prior drug-related conviction enhancement statute applied retroactively to defendant’s case that was pending on appeal when the new law became effective. (101) (848) (926)
Defendant pled guilty to transporting methamphetamine and admitted having suffered four prior drug-related convictions within the meaning of Health and Safety Code section 11370.2, subd. (c). After his sentencing, section 11370.2 was modified such that his prior drug offenses no longer constituted qualifying convictions. The new law applied to the case under In re Estrada (1965) 63 Cal.2d 740, and the case was remanded so that the court could strike the enhancements.
People v. Millan ____ Cal.App.5th ____, ____ Cal.Rptr.3d ____, 2018 D.A.R. 1344 (4th Dist. 2018) February 13, 2018 (D071437)
After obtaining a reduction of a felony to a misdemeanor under Prop 47, the court had the authority to apply defendant’s excess custody credits to reduce the duration of his PRCS. (105) (801)
Defendant serving a prison sentence for multiple felony convictions obtained Prop 47 relief reducing one of his convictions to a misdemeanor. Following resentencing, his custody credits exceeded the newly imposed term. The trial court had the authority to apply the credits to reduce the duration of postrelease community supervision.
People v. Steward ____ Cal.App.5th ____, ____ Cal.Rptr.3d ____, 2018 D.A.R. 1413 (1st Dist. 2018) February 09, 2018 (A148242)
The trial court erred by preventing defendants from using their contractor’s licenses as a condition of bail absent a showing of necessity. (540)
Defendants were charged with fraudulent use of a contractor’s license in violation of Business and Professions Code section 7027.3. The trial court erred by preventing them from using their contractor’s licenses as a condition of bail absent an evidentiary hearing establishing the condition was necessary to protect the public.
Nandu v. Superior Court ____ Cal.App.5th ____, ____ Cal.Rptr.3d ____, 2018 D.A.R. 1346 (4th Dist. 2018) February 07, 2018 (E068437)
The “no drug use” probation condition was invalid given the lack of evidence that defendant had used drugs in the last 10 years. (810)
Defendant was convicted of vandalism. He challenged the “no alcohol” probation condition since he was over 21, and there was no evidence he’d been drinking at the time of the incident. However, he was a member of a gang that regularly met at the park and drank, and so the probation condition was valid. However, the “no drug use” condition was invalid as there was no evidence that he had used or sold drugs or marijuana for 10 years.
People v. Acosta ____ Cal.App.5th ____, ____ Cal.Rptr.3d ____, 2018 D.A.R. 1317 (4th Dist. 2018) February 06, 2018 (D071575)