THE WEEK’S CASES: for the week ending December 2, 2016
by Al Menaster, Deputy Public Defender, Los Angeles County Public Defender’s Office.
DOUBLE JEOPARDY NOT A BAR TO RETRIAL OF INCONSISTENT VERDICTS
We’ve never gotten action when the jury returns inconsistent verdicts, and we lose another case in this area. The defendants were charged with bribery, conspiracy to bribe, and traveling in interstate commerce to bribe. The jury convicted the defendants of bribery but acquitted them of the other two charges, even though the only issue in the case was whether there was bribery. The federal appellate court reversed the bribery conviction on grounds unrelated to the inconsistent verdicts. The defendants now claim double jeopardy. A unanimous Supreme Court holds that there’s no double jeopardy bar, claiming that the inconsistent verdicts might mean anything and “issue preclusion does not apply when verdict inconsistency renders unanswerable what the jury necessarily decided.”
Bravo-Fernandez v. U.S.; 15-537; 11/30/16; US Supremes
STRIKE PRIORS: THE RECORD OF CONVICTION CAN’T BE RELIED ON [More…] »
Trial Counsel’s Responsibilities to Youth Offenders in Light of Franklin & Perez – Sat., January 14, 2017
The California Public Defenders Association presents…
Trial Counsel’s Responsibilities to Youth Offenders in Light of Franklin & Perez
Saturday January 14, 2017
At The Hyatt Regency Mission Bay
1441 Quivira Road, San Diego, California 92109
Laura Arnold, Deputy Public Defender, Riverside County
Bart Sheela, Deputy Alternate Public Defender, San Diego County
This important half-day program was added to CPDA’s training calendar this year in direct response to the landmark order in last May’s California Supreme Court case, People v. Franklin. This case, creates an affirmative duty for trial counsel to create and submit “a time capsule” regarding the client’s “youth factors”, to be opened, considered, and given “great weight” when the client is being considered for Youthful Offender Parole after 15 or more years of confinement. This duty applies to all clients who committed a crime when they are or were younger than 23, which will result in an indeterminate, non-LWOP, sentence or even a determinate term sentence which will result in at least 15 years of confinement. What exactly is our duty, how do we fulfill it, and why is it likely to matter? Please join us either ONLINE (self-study credits) via the CPDA members website live streaming, or IN PERSON (participatory credits) in sunny San Diego, to learn how to identify your YOP-eligible clients, how to represent and advise them, and what exactly we’re supposed to have been doing ever since Franklin was decided.
PROGRAM 567 – SATURDAY – JANUARY 14, 2017
Trial Counsel’s Responsibilities to Youth Offenders in Light of Franklin & Perez [More…] »
CACJ & CPDA 2017 Capital Case Defense Seminar
CACJ & CPDA proudly present the
2017 Capital Case Defense Seminar
February 17-20, 2017
Hilton San Diego Bayfront
California Attorneys for Criminal Justice (CACJ) and the California Public Defenders’ Association (CPDA) are pleased to invite you to participate in the 2017 Capital Case Defense Seminar (CCDS). The CCDS is an intensive educational opportunity for anyone involved in, or considering taking on, the defense of a capital case. It is designed not only for lawyers, but also for mitigation specialists, paralegals, investigators, and experts working in capital defense. The CCDS will also include sessions addressing murder and felony charges other than capital cases.
The CACJ/CPDA Capital Case Defense Seminar is the largest of its kind in the nation. CCDS is unique in that it offers lectures as well as specialized workshops that give participants the chance to brainstorm and exchange information with other participants. Experienced practitioners in any jurisdiction and those just entering the field can benefit from the lectures and workshops featuring experienced lawyers and experts, from both California and across the nation.
Complete program details and registration available via this link: https://www.cacj.org/Events/CACJ-CPDA-CCDS-Registration/Seminar-Information/Registration-Form.aspx
Criminal Law Case Summaries: October-November 2016
by Gary Mandinach, Attorney at Law, California Appellate Project, Los Angeles, California
1. People v. Cady (2016) Cal.App.5th , reported on October 24, 2016, in 2016 Los Angeles Daily Journal 10445, the Fourth Appellate District, Division 1 held that driving under the influence of alcohol causing injury, section 23153, subdivision (a), is a lesser included offense of driving under the combined influence of alcohol and a drug causing injury, section 23153, subdivision (f). Additionally, the Court of Appeal found that the trial court did not err in failing to sua sponte on vehicular manslaughter while intoxicated, section 191.5, subdivision (a), as a lesser included offense of gross vehicular manslaughter while intoxicated, section 191.5, subdivision (b) . Counsel made a deliberate decision not to seek such an instruction and told the court the defendant agreed with that decision, and there was no evidence from which a jury might conclude that defendant committed the lesser offense.
2. People v. Johnson (2016) Cal.App.5th , reported on October 24, 2016, in 2016 Los Angeles Daily Journal 10462, the Fourth Appellate District, Division 2 held that the trial court erred by not instructing the jury, in a retrial on second degree murder, on which the first jury hung, on prior convictions for manslaughter, section 191.5, subdivision (a), and hit and run, Vehicle Code section 20001, subdivision (b)(2), which he suffered in the first trial, during the retrial after the hung jury on the second degree murder count. (See People v. Batchelor (2014) 229 Cal.App.4th 1102.) The trial court=s instruction during the retrial on the second degree murder, that defendant had been convicted of two of the three charges brought by the district attorney, and that the jury=s task would be to address the one count that was left unresolved in the first trial, impermissibly and prejudicially allowed jury to speculate as to what the two unknown charges from the previous trial might have been. This left open the distinct possibility that defendant would, absent a conviction for murder, avoid any conviction holding him directly accountable for the death of the victim.
Proposition 64 – The Adult Use of Marijuana Act of 2016 – Resource Center for Defenders
Most recent update: November 11, 2016 | 11:04 am
First published November 10, 2016. Updated as additional documents become available.
This Proposition 64 Resource Center (The Adult Use of Marijuana Act of 2016), will be seeing many resources added over the next few weeks, so be sure to subscribe to the Defender411 notices for this website if you’d like a notice each time something is posted on the site, including to this resource center.
(Note: You must log in (over on the right side of this page) to view this members-only content (see log-in box on upper right panel of this page) If you have problems logging in, you can email tech support at claratech @ cpda.org All practice tips and practice samples are on this site but members cannot access them until fully logged in on this site, which you may do by using the login box on the right side of this page. If you have not renewed your membership, you can do that via this link, or you can call during business hours 1.800.538.4993 x 304 and renew by phone to gain access to this members website.
Proposition 57 – Criminal Sentences, Parole, Juvenile Criminal Proceedings and Sentencing Act of 2016 – Resource Center for Defenders
Most recent update: November 10, 2016 | 11:37 pm
First published November 9, 2016. Updated as additional documents become available.
This Proposition 57 Resource Center will be seeing many resources added over the next few weeks, so be sure to subscribe to the Defender411 notices for this website if you’d like a notice each time something is posted on the site, including to this resource center.
(Note: You must log in (over on the right side of this page) to view this members-only content (see log-in box on upper right panel of this page) If you have problems logging in, you can email tech support at claratech @ cpda.org All practice tips and practice samples are on this site but members cannot access them until fully logged in on this site, which you may do by using the login box on the right side of this page. If you have not renewed your membership, you can do that via this link, or you can call during business hours 1.800.538.4993 x 304 and renew by phone to gain access to this members website. Note: The Prop. 57 analysis document is available on the front page of this site without logging in, but any sample practice documents and memos related to tips and suggestions, etc. that are written specifically for defenders are not accessible unless you log in (and fully access this resource page).
New Self-Study Opportunity – The 2016 Annual Homicide Defense Practice Seminar – Full program online for MCLE Self-Study
Annual Homicide Defense Seminar
(Self-Study credit via Internet, Participatory credit for in-person attendance)
Recorded over the dates of Friday & Saturday September 16-17, 2016
Kathleen Cannon, Attorney at Law, Vista, California
Bart Sheela, Deputy Alternate Public Defender, San Diego County
This year`s Annual Homicide Defense Seminar VIEWED ONLINE will provide you with up to six hours of continuing legal education SELF-STUDY credits, by addressing some very important aspects in the defense of homicide cases. We will cover important topics that include Homicide Law from a Defense Perspective, Video Evidence, Use of Experts, Cold Cases, Natural and Probable Consequences!
See below for details regarding topics and speakers.
The entire CPDA Calendar of Events page is located HERE
New Report – Forensic Science in Criminal Courts: Ensuring Scientific Validity of Feature-Comparison Methods
The President’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology (PCAST) has released its report: Forensic Science in Criminal Courts: Ensuring Scientific Validity of Feature-Comparison Methods.
President’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology recommends actions to strengthen forensic science and promote its more rigorous use in the courtroom.
Today, the President’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology (PCAST) released its latest report to the President, Forensic Science in Criminal Courts: Ensuring Scientific Validity of Feature-Comparison Methods. “Forensic science” refers to the application of scientific or technical practices to the recognition, collection, analysis, and interpretation of evidence for criminal and civil law or regulatory issues. Developments over the past two decades—including wrongful convictions in which forensic science has played a role and scientific studies of forensic science methods—have called increasing attention to the question of the scientific validity and reliability of some important forms of forensic evidence and of testimony based upon them.
The study that led to the report was a response to the President’s question to his PCAST in 2015, as to whether there are additional steps on the scientific side, beyond those already taken by the Administration in the aftermath of a highly critical 2009 National Research Council report on the state of the forensic sciences, that could help ensure the validity of forensic evidence used in the Nation’s legal system.
PCAST concluded that two important gaps warranted the group’s attention: (1) the need for clarity about the scientific standards for the validity [More…] »
Defender 411 Radio
Defender 411 Radio Station. This station includes legislative news updates, information on upcoming seminars long before they’re distributed, president’s messages, alerts regarding state bar news and calls for public comment; and other audio resources, not all of which qualifies for MCLE self-study credits (a calendar will be added that so notes those broadcasts that do, similar to Claranet 411 Radio). News flashes and other urgent messages fo for members will interrupt any broadcast currently in progress.
New mobile apps for CPDA members – Download from the Apple App and/or the Google Play store
The CPDA Members App. The CPDA Members App was created to help build a closer-knit community among members. Members of CPDA who download the app can join conversations, share photos, learn about events, and locate contact information for all members.
The California Public Defenders Association (CPDA) is a nonprofit organization that serves as a resource center for its members who are all criminal defense attorneys – both private attorneys who practice criminal defense in California, and public defenders who are criminal defense attorneys employed by local county public defender agencies. The organization was formed over 40 years ago and today provides numerous on-site training programs through the year and in different locations held throughout the state of California, all designed exclusively for criminal defense attorneys who practice in California. Together, the two groups of criminal defense attorneys (private defenders and public defenders) comprise the membership of CPDA, which totals over 3,400 practicing criminal defense attorneys in California, in particular, but the membership is open to criminal defense attorneys in other states and several hundred from throughout the U.S. are associate members of CPDA.
Two options to download the CPDA Members App:
1. Download from the Google Play Store:
2. Download from the Apple App Store:
The CLARANET App. For CPDA members with the additional “Claranet” subscription, there’s an additional app that is [More…] »