Los Angeles Criminal Defense and Appeals Lawyer Blog

California’s Three Strikes Law

Published on: November 18, 2021 | by Power Trial Lawyers

While California is on the cutting-edge of criminal justice reform, in large part, this is due to the extremely harsh sentencing laws enacted in decades past. Most notably, California’s three strikes law, codified in Penal Code § 667, provides for increasingly harsh sentences for those who have been convicted of certain felony crimes. In some cases, the California three strikes law can result in an additional 25-year to life sentence on top of the sentence for the most recent conviction.

The History of the California Three Strikes Law

Back in 1994, during the height of the war on drugs and while many California cities were plagued by the highest rate of violent crime in history, Governor Wilson signed AB 971 into law. AB 971 was known as the “Three Strike and You’re Out” law or, more commonly, as the “Three Strikes Law.”

Certificates of Rehabilitation Are an Underutilized Resource for Many Former California Inmates

Published on: November 3, 2021 | by Power Trial Lawyers

The effects of a felony conviction are severe and remain with you for life. However, by obtaining a certificate of rehabilitation, inmates can regain many of the liberties they’ve been deprived of due to their conviction. While certificates of rehabilitation are not new, by any means, they are underutilized, in large part, because they are misunderstood. Read on to learn more about certificates of rehabilitation and how to obtain one.

What Is a Certificates of Rehabilitation?

A certificate of rehabilitation is a court determination that a former inmate has been fully rehabilitated. In this way, a certificate of rehabilitation does not help currently incarcerated inmates; however, it can help formerly incarcerated inmates on their journey to rebuild their lives and become contributing members of society.

SB 775 May Help You Reduce Your Manslaughter and Attempted Murder Convictions, Much Like SB 1437

Published on: September 22, 2021 | by Power Trial Lawyers

Senate Bill 775 passed the senate and the assembly this month, on September 10, 2021. It has been passed off to Governor Newsom for final signature. If signed, this bill will help reduce the sentence of those convicted of attempted murder and manslaughter, if they meet the SB 775 criteria.

SB 775 is retroactive, meaning, a petitioner can apply this new law to a case, despite it being final. Previously, SB 1437 changed the felony murder rule. Under SB 1437, those convicted per “the natural and probable consequences doctrine” were able to petition the court to re-examine their case. More specifically, per SB 1437, if an accused did not: (1) act with reckless indifference to human life, or (2) was not a major participant to homicide, they were able to petition for re-sentencing.

However, SB 1437 formally applied to those convicted of homicide. Formally, the law did not apply to those convicted of lesser offenses, such as attempted murder or manslaughter. The SB 1437 criteria left out those who were facing homicide charges, but decided to comply with the District Attorney’s office during their prosecution by accepting a plea deal for a lesser offense. Now, under SB 775, qualifying individuals may apply.

The Breakdown of California’s New Sentencing Enhancement Laws

Published on: September 21, 2021 | by Power Trial Lawyers

Below are recent changes introduced by way of a Senate Bill:

Senate Bill 180

Effective: January 1, 2018.

Matthew Barhoma with Power Trial Lawyers, P.C. Weighs in on a Motion for New Trial, Appellate Chances, and Various Post-Conviction Remedies

Published on: September 14, 2021 | by Power Trial Lawyers

Mollie Tibbets’ alleged killer has been convicted of her murder by a jury. While the jury found him guilty, he took the stand in his own case, attesting there were others involved and he was under duress. At first, the testimony seemed strange. And ultimately, the jury did not buy it, when they convicted him of her murder.

During the sentencing phase, Mollie Tibberts’ alleged killer brings a Motion for a New Trial, which is a motion to bring about a new trial based on “new and additional evidence.”

In this video, California Criminal Appeals attorney, Matthew Barhoma, founder of Power Trial Lawyers, P.C. breaks down analysis regarding the new evidence and outlines all the ways you can use this evidence. This analysis covers even how to use “new and additional evidence” in a Writ of Habeas Corpus setting and in other post-conviction and appellate procedures.

Renowned California Appellate Attorney Explains Franklin Petitions and Importance of Mitigating Factors of Youthfulness

Published on: September 2, 2021 | by Power Trial Lawyers

If you were under the age of 26 at the date of the offense giving rise to a criminal conviction, you may be eligible for a Franklin Hearing that would allow you to introduce mitigating factors of youthfulness, which can in turn lead to lighter sentencing and increased Parole Board hearings. In this article, California Criminal Appeals attorneys of Power Trial Lawyers, P.C. explains:

What is a Franklin Petition is and What it Does;
Who is Eligible for a Franklin Petition;

State and Federal Writs for Habeas Corpus, Generally Explained by Leading Criminal Appeals Lawyer

Published on: July 22, 2021 | by Power Trial Lawyers

The writ of habeas corpus, or the “Great Writ” as it is also known, is a powerful tool. The writ of habeas corpus calls for the review of an individual’s incarceration, requiring the government to justify why it is holding someone in custody. When properly used, a writ of habeas corpus can compel the release of an inmate. However, as powerful as the Great Writ is, it is also commonly misunderstood. These misunderstandings can often result in inmates improperly filing for habeas relief, possibly risking proper review in the future. In the post, leading California criminal appeals lawyer explains: (1) what a Writ of Habeas Corpus is; (2) the differences between state and federal writs of Habeas Corpus, and (3) the requirements of Exhausting your state legal remedies.

What Is a Writ of Habeas Corpus?

Simply put, a writ of habeas corpus calls into question the continued incarceration of an individual. Thus, aside from direct appeal relief, a petition for writ of habeas corpus is another important way for inmates to challenge their conviction or sentence. However, unlike an appeal, a writ of habeas corpus does not give a petitioner the chance to relitigate their case. Writs of habeas corpus are limited to situations in which someone is incarcerated due to an incorrect application of law or newly present circumstances justifying their release.

Governor Gavin Newsom Recommends the Commutation of a Power Trial Lawyers, P.C. Client!

Published on: June 9, 2021 | by Power Trial Lawyers

Governor Gavin Newsom recommends for Commutation the Application of a Power Trial Lawyers, P.C. Client who spent nearly three decades behind bars.

Power Trial Lawyers, P.C. receives the Commutation Recommendation from Governor Gavin Newsom’s office. The Power Trial Lawyers, P.C. client may soon be walking free. Historically, Governors will wait and issue a number of Commutations and other Pardons at the end of their term. However, Governor Newsom has elected to issue commutations more periodically. And in making these issuance, he has recieved and reviewed the Commutation Application of a deserving Power Trial Lawyers Client and has recommended his sentence to be commuted.

Traditionally, the Governor’s office has free reign and control to commute sentences in any way they deem fit. One thing the Governor’s office can do is recommend a sentence for commutation by sending the case, alongside the commutation recommendation, to the office of the Parole Board, who will put together a review and hold a hearing. Once that’s completed successfully, it will be sent back to the Governor’s office for final commutation. This particular Power Trial Lawyers client may soon be walking free after nearly 30 years of incarceration.

The Importance of Franklin Hearings for Young People Convicted of Serious Crimes

Published on: May 26, 2021 | by Power Trial Lawyers

A Franklin hearing is a procedural mechanism that allows a person convicted of a serious crime to present evidence of their youthfulness, not to excuse their actions but to put them into context.

Franklin hearings arose out of a 2016 case involving a 16-year-old boy who shot and killed another teenager. At trial, Tyris Lamar Franklin was sentenced to a total term of 50 years to life. On appeal, Franklin argued that his sentence was the functional equivalent of life without the possibility of parole. Previously, the California Supreme Court determined that juveniles found guilty of non-homicide offenses could not be sentenced to the functional equivalent of life without the possibility of parole. Franklin argued that his 50-plus year sentence qualified as such, and sought relief.

The court denied Franklin the relief he was seeking, noting that subsequent changes to California law allowed Franklin a parole hearing after 25 years. However, under existing state law, at Franklin’s eventual parole hearing, the parole board must “give great weight to the diminished culpability of juveniles as compared to adults, the hallmark features of youth, and any subsequent growth and increased maturity.” Because Franklin was sentenced before these changes went into effect, he did not have an opportunity to put this evidence on the record.

Supreme Court Issues Important Opinion for Californians Sentenced to Life Without the Possibility of Parole for a Juvenile Offense

Published on: May 12, 2021 | by Power Trial Lawyers

Recently, the United States Supreme Court issued an opinion in the case of Jones v. Mississippi. The case required the Court to determine the proper procedure that a court must follow when sentencing a juvenile offender to life in prison without the possibility of parole.

Historically, juveniles were frequently charged as adults. It wasn’t until relatively recently that the juvenile justice system came into existence. The juvenile justice system has a primary focus on rehabilitation. Minors can also “age out” of the juvenile justice system, limiting the length of time they are subject to incarceration or supervision. Thus, whenever possible, juveniles benefit from staying in the juvenile justice system.

For the most part, juveniles who are charged as adults face the same punishments that adults do. There are two important exceptions: the death penalty and life in prison without the possibility of parole (JLWOP). In recent years, the U.S. Supreme Court has held that juveniles cannot be sentenced to death. Subsequently, the Court determined that, while juveniles can be sentenced to life in prison without the possibility of parole, a trial court must follow strict procedures that allow proper consideration of the defendant’s age.