In 1987, in McClesky v. Kemp, the U.S. Supreme Court limited courts’ ability to address systemic discrimination by requiring defendants to prove purposeful discrimination by more than statistical disparities. Unfortunately, the Court failed to recognize the reality that most systemic biases are unintentional and throughout the years have been more damaging than occurrences of outright racism. As a result, the decision by the Court left thousands of defendants without recourse.

Fortunately, as part of the ongoing effort to rectify the troubling and devastating effects that California’s laws and policies have had on minority communities and to redress the McClesky decision, in 2020, the State legislature passed AB 2542, which prohibited the state from seeking a conviction or a sentence on the basis of race, ethnicity, or national origin. Recognizing that AB 2542 did not go far enough, in 2022, the California legislature passed AB 256 or the Racial Justice Act for All. The new bill provided a staggered timeline for defendants with cases in which final judgment was entered before January 1, 2021, to seek relief. Moreover, AB 256 expands the type of evidence that defendants can present and requires courts to consider the totality of the evidence and not only statistical evidence.

According to the timeline provided in AB 256, starting on January 1, 2024, any person who is currently serving a sentence in state prison or county jail can file a habeas corpus petition based on a claim under AB 256, which was codified under Penal Code section 745. Moreover, AB 256 amended Penal Code section 1473, not only to allow for habeas corpus petitions based on racial discrimination claims, but to also allow defendants with pending petitions to amend their existing petitions with a claim that their conviction or sentence was the result of a violation of the new Penal Code section 745(a).

The process of challenging a conviction or a sentence under AB 256 is going to be a complex one. Starting on January 1, 2024, defendants who are currently in custody will be able to file a petition for writ of habeas corpus. In order to obtain a hearing, a defendant is required to make a prima facie showing that there was a violation of PC 745(a). This means that the petition has to put forward facts that, if true, would establish a substantial likelihood that a PC 745(a) violation had occurred.

At the evidentiary hearing, the burden of proof will be on the defendant to show by a preponderance of the evidence that a violation had occurred. However, the defendant will not be required to prove intentional discrimination. Furthermore, if the defendant shares an ethnicity, race, or national origin with more than one group, then he or she can produce aggregate evidence to prove that there was a violation. If the court finds that a violation had indeed occurred, the court is mandated to impose a remedy. While the exact remedy is going to be within the discretion of the court, the possible post-judgment remedies include vacating the conviction or sentence and ordering new proceedings; modifying the judgment to a lesser offense; or vacating the sentence and imposing a new one, which cannot be greater than the one previously imposed.

AB 256 provides an additional avenue for defendants to seek post-conviction relief. The experienced and compassionate post-conviction attorneys at the Justice Firm are ready to answer your questions and evaluate your case to determine if you qualify for post-conviction relief under this or any other law. If you or a loved one wants to know more about this law, or if you think that AB 256 impacts your case, contact our California appeals attorneys today for a case evaluation locally at (310) 914-2444 or at our Toll-Free number at (866) 695-6714, or click here.

One of the main principles of the criminal justice system is that the punishment has to fit the crime. Unfortunately, California’s hyper punitive policies enacted in the 1980s and 1990s, resulted in a serious distortion of one of the most basic legal standards of the criminal justice system. By the end of the 1990s, California’s legislature had managed to enact more than one hundred different enhancements, which have added years to the prison sentences of majority of inmates. The State’s aggressive sentencing enhancement laws have led to mass incarceration, overburdening of the state’s budget, and most importantly, have disproportionately affected marginalized and minority communities and their economies.

There have been numerous studies on enhancements that have shown that adding time to an already lengthy sentence has not been a successful deterrent to crime and has not had a positive impact on public safety. In line with these studies, the California legislature has been working hard to enact laws that will prevent the application of indiscriminate sentence enhancements while still allowing judges to impose harsh and lengthy sentences when the conduct demands it.

One of the most commonly used sentence enhancement has been the California Penal Code §667(a), which is a 5-year enhancement given for each prior serious felony conviction when a person is currently charged with a serious felony. Prior to 2019, courts were mandated to add the 5-year enhancement and they were prevented from considering the specifics of a case, the seriousness of the offense, or the defendant’s history and other mitigating circumstances.

Penal Code §1385 states that a judge may dismiss an action in furtherance of justice, which provides judges with a broad discretion to strike enhancements. This allows judges to tailor a sentence to a particular case and defendant, which can help ensure that the given sentence is proportional to the conduct in question and eliminates mandatory and arbitrary sentences, which can only lead to unjust and discriminatory results. However, prior to 2019, the law specifically prohibited judges from using their discretion under PC 1385, when it came to the application of the 5-year enhancement for prior serious felony.

That changed with SB 1393, which came into effect on January 1, 2019. SB 1393 eliminated the mandatory application of the 5-year prior serious felony enhancement, and allowed judges to use their discretion under Penal Code §1385 to strike such enhancements in furtherance of justice. As a result of the enactment of SB 1393, judges are now allowed to consider the specific facts and the conduct of the defendant, as well as any mitigating circumstances or factors.

While the Fair and Just Sentencing Reform Act is not retroactive, along SB 1393, the California legislature also passed AB 2942, which amended Penal Code Section 1172.1 and allowed courts to accept recommendations from the district attorney of the county in which the defendant was sentenced, to recall and resentence a person.

At the Justice Firm we believe that it’s very important to work with a reliable and experienced attorney who specializes in post-conviction matters. We know that the attorney-client relationship is an important aspect of your legal journey and our highly skilled attorneys are here to help and answer any questions you might have.

If you or a loved one is serving a lengthy prison sentence and have questions about this law, or if you think that this or any other new law could impact your case, contact our California appeals attorneys today for a case evaluation locally at (310) 914-2444 or at our Toll-Free number at (866) 695-6714, or click here.

The mass incarceration in California has not only caused prison overcrowding, but has also had a devastating impact on the State’s budget, as the annual cost per prisoner is over $100,000. The tough on crime policies of the 1990s have not only led to overcrowding of California’s prisons and a strain on the State’s budget, but they have also proved counterproductive and have had a detrimental impact on countless of inmates and their families, and have disproportionately affected marginal and minority communities.

Fortunately, in the last several years, California’s leaders have recognized than many of the State’s sentencing laws have not only failed to effectively serve their intended purpose of increasing public safety, but more than that, they have led to excessively punitive sentences, unnecessarily long incarcerations, and overall inequities.

One of the main principles of the criminal justice system is that the punishment has to fit the crime. As part of the ongoing effort to course-correct the State’s policies, California’s lawmakers have been enacting legislation designed to alleviate the unintended detrimental consequence of existing laws and to make the State’s criminal justice system more fair and just. One such criminal justice reform measure is SB 567, which was signed by Governor Newsom on October 8, 2021, and came into effect on January 1, 2022.

Enacted in 1977, California’s determinate sentencing law allowed judges to impose one of three sentences – a low term, a middle term, or a high term and until 2007, the law required that judges impose the middle term, unless there were aggravating or mitigating circumstance that justified the imposition of the upper or lower terms. The decision rested entirely within the discretion of the court. In 2007, in Cunningham v. California, the Supreme Court of the United States held that the State’s determinate sentencing law was unconstitutional because it violated a person’s Sixth Amendment right to a trial by a jury by allowing judges to impose an upper term based on aggravating facts, which were never presented to a jury.

In light of the ruling, in 2007, California’s legislature adopted a temporary law, SB 40, allowing judges to impose the upper term without aggravating facts being presented to the jury, if, in his or her discretion, a judge determines that the upper term best serves the interests of justice and the judge sets forth on the record the reasons for imposing the term. The temporary law implemented at the time was set to expire on January 1, 2022.

SB 567 was the sentencing reform bill that the California’s legislature enacted to replace SB 40. SB 567 creates a presumption of sentencing judgment that does not exceed the middle term, unless there are aggravating circumstances justifying the imposition of a high term. Under the new law, the aggravating facts supporting imposition of a high-term sentence have to be either stipulated by the defendant or found to be true beyond reasonable doubt at a trial by a jury or a judge in a bench trial.

Moreover, unless the aggravating facts and evidence are admissible to prove or defend against the charged offense or enhancement, or are otherwise authorized by law, a defendant has the right to request that the trial on the aggravating circumstances be separated from the trial of charges and enhancements. The new law does allow judges to consider a defendant’s prior convictions in determining sentencing based on a certified record of conviction without submitting it to the jury. Finally, SB 567 clarifies that, at the time of sentencing, a judge is required to put on the record the facts and reasons for choosing the sentence that they are imposing.

SB 567 is not retroactive in the traditional sense. However, the law does provide the possibility of retroactive relief for defendants who were sentenced to life without the possibility of parole and were under the age of 18 at the time they committed the crime. In addition to being required to serve at least 15 years of their sentence prior to petitioning the court, there are additional requirements that such individuals have to meet.

If you want to know more about this new law or want to learn if you qualify, our post-conviction attorneys are here to help. The post-conviction attorneys at the Justice Firm are ready to answer your questions and evaluate your case to determine if you qualify for post-conviction relief under this or any other laws.

While SB 567 is silent on its retroactivity other than as stated above, there is certainly interplay between this sentencing law and other recently enacted criminal justice reform measures including AB 2942.

SB 567 is part of a whole host of new measures that give additional opportunities for people to seek post-conviction relief. If you or a loved one is serving a lengthy prison sentence and have questions about this law or any other law, contact our California appeals attorneys today for a case evaluation locally at (310) 914-2444 or at our Toll-Free number at (866) 695-6714, or click here.

Given the enormous impact that a resentencing hearing could have on a defendant’s life, it is vital that you hire an experienced appeals attorney who specializes in post-conviction matters. At the Justice Firm, we work hard for all of our clients, and hiring the right attorney ensures that your case is presented in the most convincing way possible and will show why a resentencing in your case would serve the interests of justice.

As part of the ongoing effort to fight the biases and racial discrimination that have been prevalent in our criminal legal system, in 2020, the California legislature passed AB 2542, or the Racial Justice Act, which came into effect on January 1, 2021. The law prohibited the state from obtaining or seeking to obtain a criminal conviction or imposing a sentence on the basis of race, ethnicity, or national origin. The landmark law was a step in the right direction and was welcomed by criminal justice reform advocates.

Prior to the passing of AB 2542, proving racial biases was almost impossible. In the 1987 decision McClesky v. Kemp, the U.S. Supreme Court imposed an unreasonably high burden on defendants to prove racism in criminal cases. In short, the Court required defendants to prove intentional discrimination and held that statistical disparities are not enough to show a constitutional violation.

Unfortunately, for all the good AB 2542 aimed to do, it still left thousands of people behind, as it applied only to prospective cases. That issue was rectified with the passing of AB 256, which Governor Newsom signed into law on September 29, 2022. The new Racial Justice Act for All extended the protections of AB 2542 to people, who had been impacted by unfair, biased, and discriminatory convictions or sentences prior to January 1, 2021, and it applies to juvenile convictions as well.

AB 256 gives a new opportunity for people to seek post-conviction relief. If you want to know more about this new law or want to learn if you qualify, our post-conviction attorneys are here to help. The post-conviction attorneys at the Justice Firm are ready to answer your questions and evaluate your case to determine if you qualify for post-conviction relief under this or any other laws.

AB 256 came into effect on January 1, 2023. However, the new law does not apply to everyone immediately, but rather, it creates a phased-in timeline for defendants to seek post-conviction relief:

• January 1, 2023 – defendants who have been sentenced to death or individuals facing deportation;
• January 1, 2024 – defendants who are incarcerated for a felony;
• January 1, 2025 – other individuals who have felony convictions, which were entered after 2015;
• January 1, 2026 – all other individuals with a felony conviction.

The new Racial Justice Act for All not only will extend protections and provide an avenue of relief for countless of people, but it also broadens the type of evidence that a defendant can present. Under the original act, in order for a defendant to establish that a conviction or a sentence was unlawfully imposed on the basis of race, national origin, or ethnicity, he or she was required to provide statistical evidence or aggregate data. AB 256 now allows a defendant to present nonstatistical evidence and the new law requires judges to consider the totality of the evidence.

In order to prove a violation under the new law, upon making a prima facie case of a violation under the law, a defendant is entitled to hearing where he or she has to prove by a preponderance of the evidence that either:

• “The judge, an attorney in the case, a law enforcement officer involved in the case, an expert witness, or juror exhibited bias or animus towards the defendant because of the defendant’s race, ethnicity, or national origin” or
• During the course of the defendant’s trial, one of the above listed persons “used racially discriminatory language about the defendant’s race, ethnicity, or national origin or otherwise exhibited bias or animus towards the defendant because of the defendant’s race, ethnicity, or national origin, whether or not purposeful” or
• The defendant was charged or convicted of a more serious offense than similarly situated individuals of a different race, ethnicity, or national origin and prosecutors in the county “more frequently sought or obtained convictions for more serious offenses against people who share the defendant’s race, ethnicity, or national origin” or
• A longer or more severe sentence was imposed on the defendant than on similarly situated individuals and “longer or more severe sentences were more frequently imposed for that offense on people that share the defendant’s race, ethnicity, or national origin than on defendants of other races, ethnicities, or national origins.”

Explicit and implicit systemic racial biases, inequality, and discrimination have been present in our criminal justice system since its inception. The Racial Justice Act for All brings us one step closer to rectifying the injustices and the significant racial disparities that exist in California’s convictions and sentencing history.

The process of challenging a conviction or a sentence under AB 256 is complex and it is important to work with experienced and compassionate attorneys. At the Justice Firm, we know that the attorney-client relationship is an important aspect of your legal journey and our highly skilled and reliable attorneys are here to help and answer any questions you might have. If you or a loved one has questions about this law, or if you think that AB 256 could impact your case, contact our California appeals attorneys today for a case evaluation locally at (310) 914-2444 or at our Toll-Free number at (866) 695-6714, or click here.

Needless to say, the end result of the STEP Act has been devastating and has caused an immeasurable damage to entire neighborhoods and communities. For defendants, a gang member designation can have a very negative impact through their entire interaction with the criminal system, including pretrial release, sentencing, incarceration, parole, reentry, and for non-citizens an almost guaranteed deportation.

In 2020, Governor Newsom commissioned the Committee on Revision of the Penal Code to examine the California Penal Code and to issue recommendations for reform. According to the Committee’s 2020 report, the STEP Act has been applied inconsistently and has disproportionately affected communities of color. Furthermore, the report pointed out that while between 2011 and 2019 California reduced its prison population, during the same period, the number of inmates who were serving gang enhancements increased by approximately 40 percent. Moreover, according to the report, in Los Angeles, more than 98 percent of defendants with gang enhancements were people of color.

The report went further in pointing out that gang enhancement evidence are regularly grouped together with evidence of the underlying charges, which makes those evidence not only unreliable, but highly and unfairly prejudicial to a jury. In addition, because of the lax standards of proof, many people have unjustly been lumped into gang networks simply because of their families or communities. Finally, there have been no evidence to show that the wide imposition of gang enhancements has been an effective deterrent to gang related crimes or violence.

As a result of the report and other studies, the California legislature passed Assembly Bill 333 or the STEP Forward Act of 2021, which came into effect on January 1, 2022. The purpose of AB 333 was to address the inequities caused by the STEP Act and its subsequent amendments by redefining certain terms and making the standards for applying gang enhancements more rigorous, so that they are used only when it is necessary and fair. The most important changes in the law include:

• Removing certain crimes from the list of crimes eligible for gang enhancement charge. The new law removes looting, felony vandalism, and certain identity fraud violations from the list of offenses that can be used to establish a “pattern of criminal gang activity.”
• Redefining a “pattern of criminal gang activity.” The new law requires that in order to form a pattern of criminal gang activity, the crimes committed must be shown to have commonly benefited a criminal street gang and that benefit has to be more than reputational, such as financial gain, retaliation, gang rival targeting, or intimidating witnesses.
• Moreover, AB 333 explicitly prohibits the use of the crime being prosecuted to prove a pattern of criminal activity.
• Finally, the STEP Forward Act added Section 1109 to the California Penal Code, which requires that, if requested by the defense, the underlying offense must be proven first, and only if there is a finding of guilt, there should be further and separate proceedings on the truth of the gang enhancement.

At the Justice Firm, our highly skilled and experienced attorneys continuously follow the new developments in California’s laws and are always prepared to fight for our clients for lesser penalties, sentence reductions, and appeal of sentences or convictions.

We understand that the attorney-client relationship is an important aspect of your legal journey and our highly knowledgeable and compassionate attorneys are here to help and answer any questions you might have. If you or a loved one has questions about this law, or if you think that AB 333 could impact your case, contact our California criminal attorneys today for a case evaluation locally at (310) 914-2444 or at our Toll-Free number at (866) 695-6714, or click here.

Throughout the years, many immigrants in California have entered a plea or have been convicted at trial, without being properly informed of the immigration consequences of a criminal conviction. And for most non-citizens, the immigration consequences of a conviction only come to light when they find themselves in immigration court facing deportation, which, in many instances, can be years after they had completed their criminal sentence. In most of those cases, the only way for a non-citizen to avoid deportation and to remain in the United States is to challenge their criminal conviction. However, because California law did not provide a post-conviction relief for people who were no longer in custody, many people have been unjustly deported, or at best, have been stuck in the backlogged immigration system for years.

Recognizing that there are a large number of immigrants in California who have already finished serving their sentences, but who have not received the proper legal advice about the impact their convictions could have on their immigration status, the California legislature enacted Assembly Bill 813, which was codified as PC 1473.7, and became effective on January 1, 2017. Essentially, the new law gave people who were no longer in custody the ability to challenge their criminal convictions and vacate their judgments. Initially, the law was limited to convictions that were the result of a plea of guilty or nolo contendere. However, in 2021, the state legislature passed AB 1259, which amended PC 1473.7. As a result, as of January 1, 2022, the law now also provides a post-conviction relief for non-citizens who were convicted at trial.

A PC 1473.7 motion to vacate can be filed on two grounds: (1) if a prejudicial error had occurred, which damaged the defendant’s ability to meaningfully understand, defend against, or knowingly accept the actual or potential adverse immigration consequences of a conviction or sentence, or (2) if evidence of actual innocence had been discovered. Notably, the prejudicial error ground for filing a successful motion to vacate does not require a finding of ineffective assistance of counsel. Moreover, in order to establish prejudice, the moving party does not have to prove that he or she would have obtained a more favorable result in the absence of the error.

PC 1473.7 includes a timing requirement that such motions be filed with “reasonable diligence” after receiving a notice to appear in immigration court, other notice from immigration authorities, or after a notice of final removal order, whichever is later.

All PC 1473.7 motions are entitled to a hearing, and if the moving party successfully establishes by a preponderance of the evidence that he or she is entitled to a relief, the motion will be granted, and the conviction will be vacated and erased from the person’s criminal record. However, that does not guarantee that the case will be dismissed. The case will only be dismissed, if the prosecution agrees to dismiss it. In the alternative, the prosecution may offer a different plea, and if not, the case will proceed to trial.

If an individual has a criminal record, obtaining a permanent legal status or citizenship is extremely difficult, if not impossible. At the Justice Firm we fight zealously to protect our clients’ rights and we believe that everyone is entitled to the opportunity to build a better future.

If you or a loved one is facing criminal charges, or needs assistance with a post-conviction relief, our highly skilled and compassionate attorneys are here to help and to answer any questions you might have. You can contact our experienced California Criminal and Immigration attorneys today for a case evaluation locally at (310) 914-2444 or at our Toll-Free number at (866) 695-6714, or click here.

In essence, AB 3234 gives judges the power to grant a diversion to a defendant in a misdemeanor case and to postpone the case for up to 24 months. Importantly, under this law, a judge has the power to “divert” a case, even if the prosecuting attorney objects. The offer of a diversion is entirely within a judge’s discretion, which means that the defendant has to show good reasons for why he or she is worthy of being granted a diversion. In considering whether to grant judicial diversion, judges would take into account defendant’s history, character, background, and the specific facts of the case and every diversion will be tailored to the specific circumstances of each case and the crime charged.

A defendant would be deemed to have successfully completed the judicial diversion program when they complete all court-ordered terms, conditions, and programs, which can include community services, treatment programs, anger management or domestic violence classes among others. In addition, during the duration of the program a defendant has to comply with any court-ordered protective or stay-away orders, or orders prohibiting firearm possession. Finally, a defendant has to make full restitution to the victim. However, the law specifically states that a defendant’s inability to pay restitution due to indigence cannot be grounds for denial of diversion or a finding of failure to comply with the terms of the diversion.

Upon successful completion of a diversion program, the court is obligated to dismiss the case against the defendant. Not only would the case be dismissed, but also the arrest upon which the diversion was ordered will be deemed to have never occurred. In practice, what that means is that following a dismissal, in response to any question about an individual’s criminal history, a defendant can legally say that they have never been arrested. The only exception is, that if a defendant applies for employment as a peace officer, the Department of Justice can still access the arrest information, and if asked directly, a defendant has to answer that he or she has been arrested.

It is worth noting that AB 3234 specifically disqualifies certain offenses from eligibility under this diversion program, including registrable sex offenses, domestic violence offenses, and stalking offenses. Moreover, although the new law is silent on DUI misdemeanors, DUI crimes are nevertheless specifically excluded from any diversion-type programs pursuant to other laws.

Even with the above listed exceptions, the judicial diversion program does cover an extensive list of misdemeanor criminal offences. Some of the most common crimes that are eligible under the program include simple assault, simple battery, petty theft, vandalism, possession of drug paraphernalia, public intoxication, disturbing the peace, possession of a controlled substance, trespass, and much more.

A criminal record can and does have a long-term effect on an individual’s life, and a criminal conviction can lead to very harsh consequences including the retaining of or obtaining employment, a professional license, or certain benefits, and for non-citizens, it can have a devastating impact on their immigration status.

The Misdemeanor Diversion Program gives defendants a chance to have their misdemeanor cases dismissed and to avoid all the negative consequences of an arrest or conviction. At the Justice Firm, we understand the value of a solid attorney-client relationship, and are ready to work with you to achieve the best outcome possible.

If you or a loved one has been arrested and would like to know more about the judicial diversion program or any other matter, our highly skilled and reliable attorneys are here to help and answer any questions you might have. Our criminal defense attorneys have decades of experience representing individuals in all misdemeanor and felony cases and you can contact them today for a case evaluation locally at (310) 914-2444 or at our Toll-Free number at (866) 695-6714, or click here.

Fortunately, in light of the adverse immigration consequences noncitizens face, some district attorneys are starting to adjust their offices’ immigration-related policies, including the Los Angeles District Attorney, George Gascon. On December 6, 2022, Mr. Gascon issued a new special directive outlining the new immigration policies of the LA District Attorney’s Office, which, among other things, is aiming to address the overly punitive consequences accused noncitizens could face.

First, according to the new policy, prior to when a charging decision is made, any person who is under investigation or their attorney, can present information demonstrating the potential adverse immigration consequences that could follow. In such cases, all charging determinations by the DA office should be made with the goal of avoiding or mitigating any adverse consequences a charge could have, and if there are possible alternatives to charges being filed, the DA office should pursue those alternatives. In addition, the new policy encourages prosecutors to expand the use of pretrial diversion programs that do not require an admission of guilt.

Second, in line with section 1016.3 of the California Penal Code, which requires that in all plea negotiations, the prosecution has to consider the avoidance of adverse immigration consequences as a factor in reaching a resolution, the new directive makes clear that “it is in the interest of justice to endeavor to avoid or mitigate immigration consequences of criminal convictions whenever possible.” Accordingly, the new directive lays out a comprehensive plan for plea bargaining, including:

• Allowing for flexibility in sentencing, including splitting sentences across counts, as well as flexibility in sentencing for a probation violation; and
• Avoiding sentence enhancements that would turn a neutral offense into an immigration damaging one.

Furthermore, the new directive lays out the Office’s policy on post-conviction relief. In 2016, the California legislature passed section 1473.7 of the California Penal Code, which created a vehicle for noncitizens, who are no longer in criminal custody, to seek post-conviction relief by allowing them to move to vacate prior convictions when there is a “prejudicial error damaging the moving party’s ability to meaningfully understand, defend against, or knowingly accept the actual or potential adverse immigration consequences of a conviction or sentence.” In accordance with this, the new immigration policy directs prosecutors to concede without delay all motions to vacate, where it is clear from the record that a defendant was not able to comprehend, defend against, or knowingly accept the immigration consequences of a plea or a sentence.

Moreover, the new policy lists several type of cases in which it can be expected that a motion to vacate would not be opposed by prosecutors. These cases include:

• Motions to bring a sentence down from 365 to 364 days;
• Proposition 36 cases, where the defendant has completed the drug treatment diversion program;
• Post-plea deferred entry of judgment cases;
• Marijuana cases, which have been dismissed as part of the mass cannabis record clearance;
• As well as cases where the defendant has been in the military and has been honorably discharged.

In general, the new policy makes clear, that regardless of the type of case, in all motions to vacate based on immigration consequences, prosecutors should consider all mitigating factors, including whether the defendant was a juvenile; how old the conviction is; the severity of the crime and the facts of the case; as well as the defendant’s character, including family history, work history, and contributions to the community. And, in cases where it is determined that a different resolution would have been reached, if the adverse immigration consequences had been raised initially, the prosecution should stipulate to a motion to vacate.

At the Justice Firm, we know that the attorney-client relationship is an important aspect of your legal journey and we work hard for all of our clients to achieve the best outcome possible.

If you or a loved one is facing criminal charges, or is seeking post-conviction relief, or needs help with any criminal matter, our highly skilled and reliable attorneys are here to help and to answer any questions you might have. You can contact our experienced California Criminal and Immigration attorneys today for a case evaluation locally at (310) 914-2444 or at our Toll-Free number at (866) 695-6714, or click here.

For the past few decades, California has been known for its tough-on-crime policies and its extremely harsh sentences. Fortunately, the California Constitution gives an individual the right to seek a commutation of sentence. Commutation is a form of clemency that the governor has the authority to grant and is an important form of post-conviction relief. In short, commutation is a reduction or a termination of a sentence.

Almost anyone who has been convicted of a state criminal offense can apply to have their sentence commuted, with the only exception being for individuals that have been impeached. Notably, commutation applies only to state crimes, and the governor lacks the power to commute sentences for convictions in another state or country, or for federal or military offenses.

The main benefit of a commutation is the ability of an individual to leave prison or jail immediately, to become eligible for parole or to accelerate individual’s parole hearing, or to change a death sentence to a life sentence. In addition, a commutation can be used to reduce or eliminate a fine or another penalty ordered by a court.

It is important to note, that a commutation does not change or reverse the finding of guilt, and unlike a certificate of rehabilitation or a pardon, it does not restore civil rights.

Factors to be considered for Commutation

For the most part, the governor has an almost absolute authority when it comes to commutations. And while there are no set criteria in deciding whether commutation would be granted, there are a number of factors that the Governor’s office would look at and consider, including:

• The severity of the offense and the harm caused to victims;
• The applicant’s age at the time of the crime and the time already served;
• The applicant’s behavior while incarcerated, as well as whether the applicant has obtained any certificates or education while incarcerated, and if the applicant sought treatment or participated in rehabilitative programs;
• Evidence of remorse for the committed offenses as well as evidence of victim restitution or efforts to remedy the impact the offense had on the victims;
• The applicant’s age at the time of the application and the need for commutation;
• The potential impact on the community, if the applicant is released, mainly the effect on public safety, and whether a commutation will be in the interest of justice;
• Public opinion, the opinion of victims, and/or the District Attorney;
• Whether the applicant has been rehabilitated and can be re-integrated into society;
• The applicant’s plans for re-entering society, including plans for employment and housing upon release.

In addition, the governor would look at any other factors that may act as indicators as to whether a commutation is warranted or not, like the applicant’s criminal history or whether the applicant is suffering from a terminal illness or a disability.

Commutations are not easy to obtain, and the help of an experienced post-conviction attorney can be crucial. If you or a loved one are considering applying for commutation, you can contact the experienced appeals attorneys at the Justice Firm today for a case evaluation locally at (310) 914-2444 or at our Toll-Free number at (866) 695-6714, or click here. Procedure

Before submitting an application for commutation, the applicant has to notify the district attorney in the county where he or she was convicted by submitting a notice of intent to apply for clemency. In most cases, the notice has to be given ten days before filing the application. After receipt of the notice, the district attorney has the option of submitting written recommendation, and will also notify the victims, who may submit their own recommendations.

Ten days after notification, the applicant can submit his or hers application for commutation. Although not required, submitting evidence in favor of a commutation could be vital for a successful application. These evidence should include information and documents demonstrating treatment, post-conviction rehabilitation efforts, including education, training, or other self-improvement activities, as well as letters of support, and if the application is based on a chronic or terminal illness, the applicant must submit an authorization for release of medical information. All applications for commutation have to be notarized.

After submitting the application, it is up to the governor to decide what to do. There are no time limits for the governor to act on an application, although, individuals facing deportation or have some other urgent need, could receive an expedited consideration. The governor is not required to grant a commutation. Moreover, the governor does not have to even consider the application and can deny it without any further investigation. However, if the governor decides to consider the application, while not obliged to do so, he or she would most likely refer the application to the Board of Parole Hearings, which would conduct an investigation and would make recommendations to the governor.

If the governor decides to act on an application, the only real limitation comes in cases where the applicant has two or more felony convictions. In those cases, if the governor decides to grant commutation, he or she is required to submit the application to the California Supreme Court and to obtain consent by a majority of the court.

An individual is allowed to apply for commutation once every three years. During the three-year period between applications, the applicant can file a Reapplication for Clemency and request that the governor reconsiders the decision to deny or not act on the application. During the reapplication, no additional evidence that were not included with the original application can be submitted. The reapplication is simply a renewed request for the governor to take a second look at the application.

Generally, approval of an application for commutation is hard to obtain. Most often, commutation of a sentence is granted when there is a demonstration of good behavior, post-conviction education and rehabilitation, and/or to reduce an unfairly harsh sentence. For purposes of a commutation, a sentence would be considered unduly harsh because the laws at the time of sentencing were harsher, or the applicant was very young when he or she committed the offense, or if the applicant can demonstrate evidence of “intimate partner battering” or other abuse.

Applying for commutation or any other post-conviction relief can be a long and complicated process, which requires deep knowledge of the law and extensive experience in the process.

At the Justice Firm, our highly skilled and experienced appeals attorneys are ready to help and answer any questions you might have and if you or a loved one is currently serving a sentence for a state crime in California that you believe is overly punitive and/or disproportionate and would like to apply for commutation or another post-conviction relief, you can contact our California attorneys today locally at (310) 914-2444 or at our Toll-Free number at (866) 695-6714, or click here.

On December 7, 2020, Los Angeles County District Attorney George Gascon was sworn in as the County’s 43rd District Attorney. Following his defeat of Jackie Lacey, a DA who had built a reputation for a “tough-on-crime” approach, Gascon went straight to work making changes to his office true to his platform of criminal justice reform, progressive services, and rehabilitative prosecution. A main goal of his platform being lowering the prison population.

Gascon’s less punitive approach to crime includes no more gang enhancements, eliminating cash bail (including no longer seeking bail for anyone facing a misdemeanor charge or non-violent or non-serious felony), ending use of the death penalty, and providing resentencing eligibility. These major changes are expected to lead to the early release of thousands of state prison inmates whom Gascon said are unfairly serving overly long sentences.

The initial response to Gascon’s sweeping changes has included significant pushback and criticism by the public, victims and victims’ families, victims’ rights groups, Los Angeles prosecutors’ unions, and law enforcement. Gascon has in turn responded by adhering to his platform and reminding the public that he previously served as an LAPD assistant chief of police and has seen the broken inner workings of the Los Angeles criminal justice system. He stands by his position of reducing jail overcrowding and addressing more insidious issues in the District Attorney’s office including racism. What Does This Mean If I Am Facing Charges Or Have A Pending Case?

The new District Attorney’s office changes are having a major impact on new filings and pending cases. Beginning through not filing or stoping the filing of first-time misdemeanor offenses – associated with poverty and mental health such as loitering or public intoxication – and eliminating bail, going all the way to no more gang enhancements on filings and changes to sentencing; the DA changes affect cases of all sorts. Both new arrests and those already in the Los Angeles Superior Court system as pre-trials or awaiting trial outcomes. Misdemeanors and felonies.

Having your attorney work up your case is an opportunity you cannot miss. Your attorney will work aggressively at preventing charges, reducing the charges (in type or from a felony to a misdemeanor), and laying the foundation for your entire case defense. We can also guide you through the process of obtaining release via the new DA measures. This will result in you being as well prepared as possible to minimize the consequences of a criminal case with an attorney that is familiar working and negotiating with the Los Angeles District Attorney’s office.

What Do I Do Now?

If you or a relative or friend is currently in custody, has recently been arrested, or is facing an investigation or case; you must seek professional counsel. It is critical you consult with an experienced and qualified Criminal Defense Lawyer. Our California team has years of experience resolving cases successfully that are being prosecuted by the Los Angeles District Attorney’s office. Remember, you cannot leave your defense up to the parties that are trying to convict you. Contact us now for a Free Consultation.

In November 2016, California voters overwhelmingly passed Proposition 57 (64% to 35%) to enhance public safety, stop the revolving door of crime by emphasizing rehabilitation, and prevent Federal Courts from releasing inmates.

Under Prop 57, CDCR incentivizes inmates to take responsibility for their own rehabilitation with credit-earning opportunities for sustained good behavior, as well as in-prison program and activities participation. Prop 57 also moves up parole consideration of non-violent offenders who have served the full-term of the sentence for their primary offense and who demonstrate that their release to the community would not pose an unreasonable risk of violence to the community. These changes will lead to improved inmate behavior and a safer prison environment for inmates and staff alike, and give inmates skills and tools to be more productive members of society once they complete their incarceration and transition to supervision.

Lastly, Prop 57 allows Judges, not Prosecutors, to decide whether to try certain juveniles as adults in Court. Prop 57 sought to restore Juvenile Court Judges’ authority over juvenile offenders by allowing Juvenile Court Judges to determine whether or not juveniles aged fourteen and older should be prosecuted and sentenced as an adult, repealing California Proposition 21, which was passed in March 2000.

What Does Prop 57 Mean For Existing Sentences and Parole Eligibility?

There are three main provisions under Prop 57, two relating to adults and one to juveniles:

Adults:

1. Parole Eligibility Changes

2. Credit Awards Changes

Juveniles:

3. Direct Filing Eliminated

Offenders who commit multiple crimes against multiple victims will be eligible for release at the same time as offenders who only committed a single crime against a single victim.

• Repeat offenders will be eligible for release after the same period of incarceration as first time offenders.
• Offenders whose sentence was enhanced for especially egregious conduct will be eligible for release at the same time as those who did not engage in the egregious conduct.
• CDCR will have unlimited authority to award credits to all inmates, in excess of the current 15%, 20% and 50% conduct credit limitations.
• Juvenile offenders who commit violent crimes like murder, rape and carjacking cannot be filed on as adults. They must be filed on in Juvenile Court and can only be found unfit by a Judge.

What Will Happen To My Conviction And Sentence Under Prop 57?

Prop 57 allows for parole consideration to any person convicted of a non-violent felony offense and sentenced to state prison after completing the full term for his or her primary offense. The full term for the primary offense means the longest term of imprisonment imposed by the Court for any offense, excluding the imposition of an enhancement, consecutive sentence, or alternative sentence. This can mean drastically reduced eligibility periods for those facing long consecutive sentences.

Under Prop 57, inmates who comply with the rules, avoid violence, and perform duties assigned to them, are eligible to earn Good Conduct Credits. Inmates who participate in approved rehabilitative and educational programs shall be eligible to earn Milestone Completion Credits, Rehabilitative Achievement Credits, or Educational Merit Credits. Inmates who perform a heroic act in a lifethreatening situation may be eligible to receive the Extraordinary Conduct Credits.

What will the expanded credit-earning opportunities do for inmates? Credits earned for good conduct and rehabilitative and educational achievements can advance an inmate’s release date if sentenced to a determinate term, or advance an inmate’s initial parole hearing date if sentenced to an indeterminate term with the possibility of parole. Credit-earning opportunities are available to all inmates. What Do I Do Now?

If you or a relative or friend is currently in custody or served a sentence or consecutive sentences for a non-violent felony offense including theft, grand theft, grand theft auto, grand theft firearm, receiving stolen property, forgery, fraud, possession of a controlled substance, you may be eligible for relief; even if you have been denied parole. It is critical you consult with an experienced and qualified Criminal Defense Lawyer. Our California team has years of experience researching and preparing strategies for parole under Prop 57. Contact us now for a Free Consultation.

Most of us are familiar with terms like “theft” and “forgery” given that they immediately bring to mind the taking of something that does not belong to someone or making a misrepresentation in writing. When we hear the term “fraud”, we are often left confused by the exact meaning.

Fraud, technically speaking, is defined as: “A knowing misrepresentation of the truth or concealment of a material fact to induce another to act to his or her detriment. Fraud includes any intentional or deliberate act to deprive another of property or money by guile, deception, or other unfair means.” In other words, fraud is wrongful deception intended to result in financial or personal gain.

When facing criminal fraud charges, the fraud is typically of two kinds: fraud against a company (either by those that work inside or by vendors or customers) and fraud against an individual (such as identity theft or schemes). What Type Of Fraud Charges Can I Face?

Fraud charges can be filed in various ways. Most of these charges are filed as felonies given that they typically involve a significant loss and deliberate action carried out. Fraud charges may also be filed by way of a federal indictment. A federal fraud case is a very serious and complicated process with significant exposure. It is critical to be properly represented from the earliest stage possible to protect yourself. A felony criminal case can carry significant penalties and usually there are complex factors involved. For a skilled and experienced criminal lawyer, these factors mean an opportunity to formulate an intelligent defense based on the case in front of you.

There are many different types of fraud charges. You may hear many of them referred to as “White Collar Crimes” because they generally relate to financial matters and are committed by professionals or people while at work. Types of fraud cases include:

• Embezzlement
• Insurance Fraud
• Forgery
• Extortion
• Credit Card Fraud
• Bribery
• Commercial Burglary
• Mail and Health Care Fraud
• Income Tax Fraud
• Insider Trading
• Money Laundering
• False Financial Statements
• Grand Theft
• Computer Access and Fraud
• Welfare Fraud
• Mortgage Fraud
• Workers Compensation Fraud
• Receiving Stolen Property

Every fraud case is different given the circumstances, people involved, and actions carried out. At first, some of these types of fraud may not even be perceived to be criminal actions such as when facing income tax or insurance fraud charges. There are situations where someone may have been following the advice of someone else and is now in trouble. Regardless of the type of fraud charges filed, it is critical to have an attorney on the case who knows how to navigate through the paperwork and speak to the right parties.

What Do I Do Now?

If you or a relative or friend is currently in custody, has recently been arrested, or is facing a fraud investigation or case; you must seek professional counsel. It is critical you consult with an experienced and qualified Criminal Defense Lawyer. Our California team has years of experience making pre-filing fraud intervention and resolving these cases successfully. Remember, you cannot leave your defense up to fate or the parties that are trying to convict you. Contact us now for a Free Consultation.

With the recent Covid-19 (Coronavirus) pandemic, tensions are higher than ever. Quarantine, loss of work, social isolation, and all other stressors have created a perfect storm for emotional escalations. Some of these even turning physical. This has meant that domestic violence incidents have risen during the pandemic.

Though law enforcement responds to every call, not every call is a legitimate instance of domestic violence. We know that many times calls are placed with the intention of reducing an escalation; however, law enforcement is quick to jump to conclusions. Most of the time they view these calls as legitimate and these situation as instances of domestic violence. That is when then conduct an arrest.

Remember, an alleged victim cannot simply decide to drop charges. Once an investigation is in the hands of the police or sheriffs, it becomes their obligation to pursue the investigation to close and turn over the file to a prosecutor for filing consideration. The prosecutor is then who decides to file charges.

It is critical at every step of the way to intercept a filing and make your defense heard. We have been successful preventing charges from being filed by the prosecutor by making your voice and position a part of the file. Otherwise, the prosecutor has only the police reports to go by. What About My Defense Before I Appear In Court?

Domestic violence charges can be filed in various ways. Most of these charges are wobblers, meaning they can the filed as felonies or misdemeanors. A felony penalty can be devastating and carry serious consequences. As can a misdemeanor. Leaving your defense in the hands of law enforcement, the prosecutor, or a public defender is never wise. A public defender will not be assigned until the case has been filed. This means you have essentially no defense during that crucial early phase of the investigation and prosecutor review.

Having your attorney work up your case pre-file (this means before it is filed and you appear in court) is an opportunity you cannot miss. Your attorney will work aggressively at preventing charges, reducing the charges (in charge type or from a felony to a misdemeanor), and laying the foundation for your entire case defense. This will result in you being as well prepared as possible to minimize the consequences of a criminal case.

What Do I Do Now?

If you or a relative or friend is currently in custody, has recently been arrested, or is facing a domestic violence investigation or case; you must seek professional counsel. It is critical you consult with an experienced and qualified Criminal Defense Lawyer. Our California team has years of experience making pre-filing domestic violence intervention and resolving these cases successfully. Remember, you cannot leave your defense up to fate or the parties that are trying to convict you. Contact us now for a Free Consultation.

On September 30, 2018, Governor Jerry Brown signed into law Senate Bill 1437. SB 1437 became known as the Felony Murder Rule effectively changing the rules for how California charges felony murders.

Prior to SB 1437, California law allowed a defendant to be convicted of first-degree murder in the commission of a felony even if the defendant did not intend to kill the victim or did not know a murder took place. This means that in the commission of a residential burglary, for instance, if someone were killed as a result of the incident a getaway driver would be charged with and convicted or murder even if they had not stepped into the scene of the crime. This former broader law meant hundred of convictions of murder for individuals who never intended on seeing someone harmed in the commission of a felony act.

Under the new Felony Murder Rule, a person can only be convicted of murder if he killed a person in the commission of a felony, aided and abetted the killing, was a major participant in the killing, or the victim was a peace officer engaged in the performance of his duties. SB 1437 is retroactive, meaning it applies to defendants that were accused and convicted under the old law and who are now eligible for relief including appeal and resentencing.

How Do I Appeal A Sentence Under SB 1437?

Like most forms of post-conviction relief, appealing a sentence under SB 1437 requires careful processing and adhering to the rules so that the appeal is properly and timely carried out. The first step in the appeal process is filing a petition. This petition must be carefully prepared and filed in the sentencing court with service (or notice made) to the agency that prosecuted the petitioner and the attorney that represented the petitioner.

In order for the petition to be properly completed it must include a declaration from the petitioner showing he is eligible for a sentence reduction by meeting three conditions; showing he was prosecuted for murder under a natural and probable consequences theory (NPC theory) meaning that the murder was found to be a natural and probable consequence of a felony act, he was convicted of first-degree or second-degree murder following a trial or accepted such charges as a plea offer, and that he would not have been convicted of murder under California’s new Felony Murder Rule.

Once the petition has been received and accepted, that is that the petitioner has shown he is eligible for a sentence reduction, then a hearing is set to resentence. At this hearing it is not the responsibility of the petitioner to prove that his sentence should be reduced, rather it is the responsibility of the prosecutor to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the petitioner’s sentence should not be reduced.

If the prosecutor cannot prove this, then the allegations and enhancements on the conviction are vacated and the petitioner is resentenced on the remaining charges. The resentencing Judge will give credit for time served and may order the petitioner receive parole supervision for up to three years following the completion of the sentence. What Do I Do Now?

If you or a relative or friend is currently in custody serving a sentence for felony murder you may be eligible for relief. It is critical you consult with an experienced and qualified Criminal Defense Lawyer. Our California team has years of experience researching, strategizing, and preparing petitions under SB 1437. Remember, a resentence and immediate release is possible. Contact us now for a Free Consultation.

Since assuming office in January 2019, Governor Gavin Newsom has proven himself a firm proponent of broader criminal justice reforms. He has been supportive of bills to address prison overcrowding and rehabilitative/reentry measures for California prison inmates.

Since the announcement of the California Major Disaster Declaration due to Covid-19 (Coronavirus) on March 22, 2020; much focus has been placed on prison sentence commutations and alternative sentences. Specifically when it comes to prison releases, within weeks of the emergency Governor Newsom had commuted sentences of 21 California prison inmates and granted pardons to half a dozen others. This includes over a dozen inmates convicted of homicides. As Coronavirus spreads into the prison system, the Governor’s office has taken immediate measures to reduce crowding and protect the population’s health.

What Does Covid-19 (Coronavirus) Mean For Prison Inmates?

Governor Newsom’s office is taking unprecedented measures with the prison system during this health crisis. They include locking down facilities, shutting down inmate visitation and volunteer programs, blocking transfer of county jail inmates to prisons, and creating distance measures in custody from dorm to dorm and between inmates and prison employees.

The Governor’s office has now gone a step further making sentence commutations and immediately releasing prison inmates. Over 3,500 inmates are to be released early due to the crisis.

These early releases are occurring throughout California’s 35 prisons for inmates who are scheduled for release in the next sixty (60) days and for those who meet sentence relief criteria. Lawyers representing inmates in ongoing appeals and resentencing petitions are putting pressure on the prisons and Courts to take more action.

When it comes to commuted sentences, Governor Newsom’s office said via a press release that now “In addition to the public safety and justice factors that the governor normally considers when reviewing clemency cases, he also considered the public health impact of each grant, as well as each inmate’s individual health status and the suitability of their post-release plans, including housing.” Thus far nearly all of those granted commutations were convicted of violent crimes. How Can I Get Early Release?

Sentence commutations and early release dates are being achieved using complex measures. It is critical to file the necessary petitions with the correct parties and carefully monitor these filings. In particular nonviolent crimes and inmates with upcoming release dates can petition for early release. Violent crimes and individuals with vulnerable health conditions may pursue sentence commutations.

The California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation can be challenging to navigate at any time. More so now that employee restrictions and facility reorganizations can lead to confusion and delays. It is of the utmost importance to assess each case’s factors individually and make a clear plan.

What Do I Do Now?

If you or a relative or friend is currently in custody serving a sentence or awaiting sentencing to a California State Prison or County Jail Facility, you may be eligible for relief. It is critical you consult with an experienced and qualified Criminal Defense Lawyer. Our California team has years of experience researching, strategizing, and preparing filings. Remember, an early release can also provide life-saving if the inmate is high-risk for health issues. Contact us now for a Free Consultation.

On November 4, 2014 California voters passed Proposition 47, known as the Criminal Sentences, Misdemeanor Penalties, Initiative Statute. This referendum – also called the Safe Neighborhoods and School Act – recategorized some nonviolent offenses as misdemeanors rather than felonies. These offenses included crimes of theft, fraud, and drug possession.

The objective of Prop 47 was to reduce overcrowding in the state’s prison system and provide an opportunity for nonviolent offenders to obtain release and rehabilitation services. Monies saved as a result of Prop 47 would be allocated toward education and dropout prevention, mental health treatment, and drug abuse programs. All meant to keep offenders out of the prison system.

What Does Prop 47 Mean For Existing Sentences?

Prop 47 affects both future convictions and retroactively covers offenses already sentenced. A petition for resentencing would be necessary and previous felony offenses (or wobblers) would be reduced to misdemeanors and resentenced. This reduction of the punishment for the crime is referred to as a commutation or commuted sentence.

Prop 47 has already reduced California’s state prison population by tens of thousands. In the first year alone since passing 4,700 offenders were resentenced and released.

The original deadline for petitions to resentence under Prop 47 was November 4, 2017; however, due to the number of petitions made and eligible sentences, Governor Jerry Brown extended the deadline to November 4, 2022.

What Will Happen To My Conviction And Sentence?

Appealing your sentence under Prop 47 can be done by those currently serving a sentence as well as those who have completed their sentence. The process begins by filing a petition to modify the sentence (resentencing). The Judge will determine whether the conviction would have been a misdemeanor under Prop 47, grant the petition for resentencing by changing the conviction to a misdemeanor, and (if you are still serving a sentence) make an immediate reduction to your sentence. Typically resulting in release from incarceration.

For those who have already completed their sentence, the reduction from a felony to a misdemeanor can restore your rights to serve on a jury or the armed forces, improve your employment opportunities (given that you no longer have to disclose you have been convicted of a felony), and allow you to pursue professional licensure (such as insurance or real estate). Overall, the reduction of the offense from a felony to a misdemeanor means a better quality of life and future outlook.

What Do I Do Now?

If you or a relative or friend is currently in custody or served a sentence for a felony offense including theft, grand theft, grand theft auto, grand theft firearm, receiving stolen property, forgery, fraud, possession of a controlled substance, you may be eligible for relief. It is critical you consult with an experienced and qualified Criminal Defense Lawyer. Our California team has years of experience researching and preparing petitions under Prop 47. Remember, not only is the relief immediate on a commuted sentence but the impact on your future from seeing the felony reduced is significant. Contact us now for a Free Consultation.