BEGIN:VCALENDAR VERSION:2.0 PRODID:-//JudicialCouncil//NONSGML v1.0//EN BEGIN:VEVENT UID:event12578@trial.court DTSTAMP:20260407T122148Z DTSTART:20210407T160000Z DTEND:20210407T223000Z SUMMARY:Supreme Court Oral Arguments for April 7, 2021 DESCRIPTION:(Click the play icon) To view with the case information, visit here [1]. /*All Opinions are now posted*/.   {"preview_thumbnail":"/sites/default/files/newsroom/styles/video_embed_wysiwyg_preview/public/video_thumbnails/2037.jpg?itok=Dells9Jx","video_url":"https://jcc.granicus.com/player/clip/2037?view_id=12&redirect=true","settings":{"responsive":1,"width":"854","height":"480","autoplay":0},"settings_summary":["Embedded Video (Responsive)."]}   /*(1) */*/In re Friend (Jack Wayne) on Habeas Corpus, S256914 [2] View Argument [3] | Opinion filed 6-28-21 [4]/* The court directed the parties to address the following issues:  (1) Is the /dismissal/ of a condemned inmate’s habeas corpus petition pursuant to Penal Code section 1509, subdivision (d) an appealable order and subject to the requirement of obtaining a certificate of appealability under Penal Code section 1509.1, subdivision (c), which applies to the “decision of the superior court /denying relief/ on a successive petition” (italics added)?  (2) What is the meaning of the term “successive petition” in Penal Code section 1509, subdivision (d), and is the habeas corpus petition at issue a successive petition?  (3) If the habeas corpus petition at issue is a successive petition within the meaning of the statute, can the statutory provisions governing such petitions be applied to this petition when petitioner’s first habeas corpus petition was filed before the statutes took effect (see, e.g., /Landgraf v. USI Film Products/ (1994) 511 U.S. 244, 269-270)? /*(2) */*/Conservatorship of the Person and Estate of K.P., S258212 [5] View Argument [6] | Opinion filed 6-28-21 [7]/* The court limited review to the following issue:  Must the trier of fact find, beyond a reasonable doubt, that the objector is unwilling or unable voluntarily to accept meaningful treatment before a conservator may be appointed, or reappointed, under the Lanterman-Petris-Short Act (Welf. & Inst. Code, § 5000 et seq.)? /*(3)  */*/People v. Ollo (Treyvon Love), S260130 [8] View Argument [9] | Opinion filed 6-21-21 [10]/* This case presents the following issue:  Did the deceased victim’s voluntary ingestion of fentanyl furnished by the defendant in the belief that it was cocaine support imposition of an enhancement for the personal infliction of great bodily injury (Pen. Code, § 12022.7, subd. (a))? */(4) /* */People v. Garcia (Edgar Isidro), S250670 [11] and People v. Valencia (Jose Luis), S250218 [12] (consolidated cases) View Argument [13] | Opinion filed 7-1-21 [14]/* Both cases present the following issue:  Did defendant’s failure to object at trial, before /People v. Sánchez /(2016) 63 Cal.4th 665 was decided, forfeit his claim that a gang expert’s testimony related case-specific hearsay in violation of his Sixth Amendment right of confrontation? /*(5) */*/People v. Battle (Thomas Lee), [Automatic Appeal], S119296 [15] View Argument [16] | Opinion filed 7-1-21 [17]/* This matter is an automatic appeal from a judgment of death. [1] https://docs.google.com/gview?url=https%3A%2F%2Fjcc.granicus.com%2FDocumentViewer.php%3Ffile%3Djcc_6620ea5f58cf2f7fc55320adcb35d1ff.pdf%26view%3D1&embedded=true [2] https://appellatecases.courtinfo.ca.gov/search/case/mainCaseScreen.cfm?dist=0&doc_id=2291829&doc_no=S256914&request_token=NiIwLSEmTkw8W1BZSCJNUEpJUFQ0UDxTJiM%2BIztSMCAgCg%3D%3D [3] https://jcc.granicus.com/player/clip/2037?meta_id=61136 [4] https://www.courts.ca.gov/opinions/archive/S256914M.PDF [5] https://appellatecases.courtinfo.ca.gov/search/case/mainCaseScreen.cfm?dist=0&doc_id=2298680&doc_no=S258212&request_token=NiIwLSEmTkw8W1BZSCJNUElJQEQ0UDxTJiBeTztTUCAgCg%3D%3D [6] https://jcc.granicus.com/player/clip/2037?meta_id=61137 [7] https://www.courts.ca.gov/opinions/archive/S258212.PDF [8] https://appellatecases.courtinfo.ca.gov/search/case/mainCaseScreen.cfm?dist=0&doc_id=2309684&doc_no=S260130&request_token=NiIwLSEmTkw8W1BZSCJNUE9IMFA0UDxTJSJeQzlTMCAgCg%3D%3D [9] https://jcc.granicus.com/player/clip/2037?meta_id=61138 [10] https://www.courts.ca.gov/opinions/archive/S260130.PDF [11] https://appellatecases.courtinfo.ca.gov/search/case/mainCaseScreen.cfm?dist=0&doc_id=2260428&doc_no=S250670&request_token=NiIwLSEmTkw8W1BZSCJNUE5JUFA0UDxTJiJeXz1TMCAgCg%3D%3D [12] https://appellatecases.courtinfo.ca.gov/search/case/mainCaseScreen.cfm?dist=0&doc_id=2258240&doc_no=S250218&request_token=NiIwLSEmTkw8W1BZSCJNUE1IQEg0UDxTJiJeTztRMCAgCg%3D%3D [13] https://jcc.granicus.com/player/clip/2037?meta_id=61141 [14] https://www.courts.ca.gov/opinions/documents/S250218.PDF [15] https://appellatecases.courtinfo.ca.gov/search/case/mainCaseScreen.cfm?dist=0&doc_id=1850975&doc_no=S119296&request_token=NiIwLSEmTkw8W1BZSCJNUExIQFA0UDxfIiBOTzNSUCAgCg%3D%3D [16] https://jcc.granicus.com/player/clip/2037?meta_id=61142 [17] https://www.courts.ca.gov/opinions/archive/S119296.PDF X-ALT-DESC;FMTTYPE=text/html:

(Click the play icon) To view with the case information, visit here.

All Opinions are now posted.

 

{"preview_thumbnail":"/sites/default/files/newsroom/styles/video_embed_wysiwyg_preview/public/video_thumbnails/2037.jpg?itok=Dells9Jx","video_url":"https://jcc.granicus.com/player/clip/2037?view_id=12&redirect=true","settings":{"responsive":1,"width":"854","height":"480","autoplay":0},"settings_summary":["Embedded Video (Responsive)."]}

 

(1) In re Friend (Jack Wayne) on Habeas Corpus, S256914
View Argument | Opinion filed 6-28-21

The court directed the parties to address the following issues:  (1) Is the dismissal of a condemned inmate’s habeas corpus petition pursuant to Penal Code section 1509, subdivision (d) an appealable order and subject to the requirement of obtaining a certificate of appealability under Penal Code section 1509.1, subdivision (c), which applies to the “decision of the superior court denying relief on a successive petition” (italics added)?  (2) What is the meaning of the term “successive petition” in Penal Code section 1509, subdivision (d), and is the habeas corpus petition at issue a successive petition?  (3) If the habeas corpus petition at issue is a successive petition within the meaning of the statute, can the statutory provisions governing such petitions be applied to this petition when petitioner’s first habeas corpus petition was filed before the statutes took effect (see, e.g., Landgraf v. USI Film Products (1994) 511 U.S. 244, 269-270)?

(2) Conservatorship of the Person and Estate of K.P., S258212
View Argument | Opinion filed 6-28-21

The court limited review to the following issue:  Must the trier of fact find, beyond a reasonable doubt, that the objector is unwilling or unable voluntarily to accept meaningful treatment before a conservator may be appointed, or reappointed, under the Lanterman-Petris-Short Act (Welf. & Inst. Code, § 5000 et seq.)?

(3)  People v. Ollo (Treyvon Love), S260130
View Argument | Opinion filed 6-21-21

This case presents the following issue:  Did the deceased victim’s voluntary ingestion of fentanyl furnished by the defendant in the belief that it was cocaine support imposition of an enhancement for the personal infliction of great bodily injury (Pen. Code, § 12022.7, subd. (a))?

(4)  People v. Garcia (Edgar Isidro), S250670 and People v. Valencia (Jose Luis), S250218 (consolidated cases)
View Argument | Opinion filed 7-1-21

Both cases present the following issue:  Did defendant’s failure to object at trial, before People v. Sánchez (2016) 63 Cal.4th 665 was decided, forfeit his claim that a gang expert’s testimony related case-specific hearsay in violation of his Sixth Amendment right of confrontation?

(5) People v. Battle (Thomas Lee), [Automatic Appeal], S119296
View Argument | Opinion filed 7-1-21

This matter is an automatic appeal from a judgment of death.

LOCATION: END:VEVENT END:VCALENDAR