resources image
FDAP Victories
 Filter by Category

 Or, Search by Keyword


 Currently Displaying:

  • Category: All
  • Entries: 1 - 5 of 1870


> click here for tips on using this database and access to pre March 2005 victories

In re J.S. A155556 (Div. 2)
category/ies: Dependency, Educational Rights
date posted: 2019-06-03
full opinion (PDF): not available
attorney: Alexis Collentine
FDAP buddy: Louise Collari

The Court of Appeal determined that the juvenile court abused its discretion when it ordered mother and foster mother to share educational rights over the child. The juvenile court used an incorrect legal standard as it did not consider whether limiting the educational rights of mother was necessary to protect the child.

People v. Reyes, A152557 (Div. 2)
category/ies: Hearsay
date posted: 2019-05-17
full opinion (PDF): not available
attorney: Peter Goldscheider
FDAP buddy: J Bradley OConnel

In a case where the defendant was found guilty of receiving a large capacity magazine and possession of a firearm by a felon, after police found a firearm in a car in which the defendant was the front seat passenger, the trial court committed prejudicial error by: (1) excluding a hearsay declaration against penal interest made by the driver of the car that the gun was his, and (3) admitting evidence of a prior incident in which the defendant was found with firearms in his car, on the basis that it proved defendant’s knowledge.

In re McGhee, A153721 (Div. 4)
category/ies: Parole, Denial of Parole by Board of Parole Hearings
date posted: 2019-04-29
full opinion (PDF): not available
attorney: Richard Braucher
FDAP buddy:

The Court of Appeal invalidated a CDCR regulation, which effectively precluded Proposition 57 early parole consideration for inmates serving strike sentences for non-violent offenses based on their prison disciplinary records. The court found that the screening process was at odds with the clear language of the constitutional amendment.

People v. Morrison, A154092 (Div. 5)
category/ies: Discretion, erroneous understanding of law, 12022.53, Remand for Exercise of Sentencing Discretion
date posted: 2019-04-19
full opinion (PDF): not available
attorney: George Schraer
FDAP buddy: J Bradley OConnel

In a case where only an enhancement under section 12022.53, subdivision (d) was alleged, the trial court misunderstood the scope of its discretion under recent amendments to section 12022.53, which allow the court to modify the enhancement under section 12022.53, subdivision (d), which carries a term of 25 years to life, to a “lesser included” enhancement under section 12022.53, subdivision (b) or (c), which carry lesser terms of 10 years or 20 years, respectively. The Court of Appeal, therefore, remanded the case for resentencing.

People v. Taylor, A155328 (Div. 1)
category/ies: Special Circumstances, Aiding and Abetting
date posted: 2019-04-19
full opinion (PDF): not available
attorney: Philip Brooks
FDAP buddy: J Bradley OConnel

Standing alone, a defendant’s actions AFTER a murder betraying an indifference to the loss of life was insufficient to show the defendant acted with reckless indifference to human life as required by Penal Code section 190.2, subdivision (d). Under the authority of People v. Banks, a defendant acts with reckless indifference to human life when he or she knowingly creates a grave risk of death. The evidence here did not establish that the defendant had the intent to create such a risk.

 

HOME | ABOUT FDAP | NEWS | CLAIMS | CONTACT US | DISCLAIMER
Copyright © 2019 First District Appellate Project. All rights reserved