SB 1437 Successful Case, 2019
SB 1437 Successful Case, 2019
Federal Writ of Habeas Corpus Gained Key Ruling
$2.5M Breach of Contract Claim Successfully Defended Against
Application for Commutation of Sentence Granted 2021


Assembly Bill 333 (AB 333), also known as the STEP Forward Act of 2021, represents a significant shift in California’s approach to gang-related crimes. More recently, in June 2024, the California Supreme Court issued a pivotal ruling in the case of People v. Burgos, addressing the retroactive application of AB 333’s bifurcation provisions. This article delves into the details of the case, the implications of AB 333, and what this means for defendants and their legal representation, particularly in Los Angeles and Orange County criminal cases.

The Case: People v. Burgos

As experienced Los Angeles and Orange County criminal defense lawyers, we are keenly aware of the profound impact that high-profile homicide cases have on those accused and their families. Our goal is to provide a nuanced understanding of these cases, offering legal insights that prospective clients might find invaluable. This article delves into the intricate details of two prominent trials currently capturing public attention: the case of Karen Read and the trial of Young Thug, also known as Jeffery Williams. Our attorneys joined CourtTV to discuss the prominent cases on live television. 

The Case of Karen Read and the Death of Officer John O’Keefe

Background and Charges

The California Board of Parole Hearings, commonly known as the Board of Parole or BPH, is the division of the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation that is responsible for determining parole suitability for inmates in California. The Board holds hearings for inmates who are serving indeterminate sentences, such as life in prison with the possibility of parole or 25 years to life in prison. The BPH conducts hearings where inmates can present their cases for release, and victims or their families can also provide input. This Board’s role is to assess whether inmates are ready to be released back into society based on factors like their behavior in prison, rehabilitation efforts, and the nature of their crimes. The Board’s decisions are influenced by various factors, including public safety, the inmate’s own insight into their crimes, and their plans for reintegration into the community. 

These hearings, often referred to as “lifer hearings,” are absolutely critical for anyone serving an indeterminate life sentence. Read on to learn more about the BPH, the factors the Board considers during lifer hearings, and why it is important to work with a renowned Los Angeles criminal appeals lawyer throughout the BPH process. 

Who Is Eligible for a Parole Suitability Hearing?

California Criminal Appeals Attorneys Helping Obtain Resentencing Hearings Based on New Legal Developments

Note: AB 1310 is proposed legislation and is not yet enacted law. Thus, any of the remedies created by AB 1310 are not yet available and will only become available if and when AB 1310 is signed into law by Governor Gavin Newsome. This was drafted in 2023. 

California lawmakers have been busy over the past decade revamping much of the state’s criminal justice system. In particular, these reforms have been centered around California’s harsh sentencing laws, which previously were among the harshest in the nation. It’s with this backdrop that Assembly Member McKinnor introduced “Assembly Bill 1310”, which is one of the state’s newest resentencing measures. 

Senate Bill 81 (“SB 81”) is a pivotal piece of legislation that dramatically changed the landscape of California sentencing procedures. While SB 81 is undeniably relevant to anyone with a current case in the California criminal justice system, it may also be used by inmates who were sentenced years ago to help them obtain a resentencing hearing. Read on to learn more about SB 81, who can benefit from the law, and how to pursue a resentencing hearing based on monumental changes to the justice system. 

What Is SB 81?

Senate Bill 81 (Reg. Sess. 2021-2022) is one of the more dramatic criminal justice reforms California lawmakers have enacted in recent years. Drafted by Nancy Skinner of California’s 9th District, SB 81 is straightforward in its approach in that it requires a judge to strike or dismiss any sentencing enhancement “if it is in the furtherance of justice to do so.” SB 81 is not codified in California Penal Code § 1385.

If you’re charged with larceny in Orange County or Los Angeles, you need to understand the high stakes involved. A conviction could upend your life, impacting your future employment prospects, relationships, and even your freedom. It’s crucial to take any larceny charge seriously by securing skilled legal representation.

Power Trial Lawyers, P.C. is dedicated to upholding the rights and defending the interests of those facing larceny charges. Our team is known for their dedicated advocacy, strategic approach, and tireless pursuit of favorable outcomes. We have a proven track record of vigorous defense for our clients, using a thorough understanding of state and federal laws. Available around the clock, we can be reached at (844) 844-7693. Let our experienced legal team be your guiding resource and protector in the battle against larceny charges. Stand strong in the face of adversity with Power Trial Lawyers, P.C.

Definition of Larceny

On October 8, 2023, California took a significant stride in criminal justice reform with the enactment of Assembly Bill 600, widely referred to as “AB 600”. This legislative development, approved by Governor Newsome, marks a paradigm shift in the state’s approach to resentencing hearings for inmates, introducing the concept of Judicial Initiated Sentencing. In this article, we will discuss AB 600, how it came about, how it works, and what applicants may anticipate if filing for an AB 600 “judicial initiated” resentencing.

Understanding AB 600: An Evolution in Resentencing

AB 600 stands as a pioneering California law designed to augment judges’ discretion in ordering resentencing hearings for inmates serving extended sentences for serious crimes. To grasp the nuances of AB 600, it is crucial to contrast its provisions with the previous legal landscape.

If you’ve applied for or defended against a California restraining order, you may have noticed the term “CLETS” on some of the forms you filled out. CLETS stands for “California Law Enforcement Telecommunications System” and is used as a designation for certain restraining orders. The primary difference between a CLETS restraining order and a traditional restraining order is that law enforcement is authorized to arrest anyone in violation of a CLETS restraining order. While a violation of a non-CLETS order could also result in an arrest, that is rarely the case because non-CLETS orders are not entered into the CLETS database. Read on to learn about the other differences between CLETS and non-CLETS restraining orders.

How Does a CLETS Restraining Order Work?

Before you formally ask the court to grant a restraining order, you must fill out a few different forms. For example, if you are seeking a Domestic Violence Restraining Order, you will need to complete the Request for Domestic Violence Restraining Order (DV-100), where you’ll provide some basic information about yourself and the abusive party and outline the abuse they’ve subjected you to. In addition, you are required to complete form CLETS-001 – Confidential CLETS Information.

Posted in:
Published on:

Recently, California lawmakers passed Assembly Bill 333, which is just one of the recent criminal justice reforms targeting the state’s outdated sentencing laws. Assembly Bill 333 specifically takes aim at one of the most used sentencing enhancements in courts across California—the gang enhancement under California Penal Code § 186.22.

What Is California Assembly Bill 333 and What Does It Do?

California Assembly Bill 333, commonly referred to as AB 333, is a piece of legislation that was enacted to reform aspects of California’s criminal justice system, specifically focusing on gang enhancements and the criteria for determining what constitutes a “criminal street gang” under the terms of the law. The bill was introduced by State Senator Sydney Kamlager and amends California Penal Code § 186.22.

Posted in:
Published on:

At Power Trial Lawyers, we provide legal services for a unique criminal defense area – Homicide due to Driving Under the Influence (DUI). Servicing clients in Los Angeles and Orange County, we understand that every DUI homicide case is unique, with varying factors that can significantly impact the outcome. With our extensive experience in handling complex cases, we work meticulously to protect our clients’ rights while aiming for a favorable outcome. While dealing with the consequences of such charges, you need dedicated legal advocates who can diligently analyze your case and navigate through the complexities of the legal system for you. Contact us on (213) 800-7664, and allow our knowledgeable team to guide you during this difficult time. Trust us to stand with you, every step of the way.

Elements of Homicide Involving DUI

Understanding the laws surrounding Homicide Based on DUI (Driving Under the Influence) can be complicated, and the gravity of facing such charges in California can be extremely overwhelming. Our Los Angeles and Orange County firm offers highly knowledgeable and experienced legal services to those who find themselves alleged with these offenses. In the Golden State, the law stipulates that if an individual, while operating a motor vehicle under the influence, causes the death of another, they could be charged with vehicular manslaughter while intoxicated under Penal Code 191.5(b) PC, or “Watson Murder” under Penal code 187 – second-degree murder.

Posted in:
Published on:
Justia Lawyer Rating
State Bar of California
The National Trial Lawyers Top 40 under 40
The National Trial Lawyers, Top 100 trial lawyers
Best Lawyers
Lawyers of Distinction
Super Lawyers
Super Lawyers Rising Stars
Contact Information