240 Cal. App. 4th 885
Cal. Ct. App.2015Background
- William R. Danser, a former Santa Clara County superior court judge, was convicted by a jury (April 2004) of conspiracy to pervert/obstruct justice (a wobbler punishable as a felony) and several misdemeanors; he retired in July 2004 and had ~9 years of JRS II service credits.
- After retirement CalPERS concluded Danser forfeited his JRS II benefits under Gov. Code § 75526, returned only his member contributions, and denied restoration of his accrued monetary credits.
- The Court of Appeal affirmed Danser’s criminal convictions and the California Supreme Court denied review in May 2006; later the trial court suspended imposition of sentence, granted early termination of probation, reduced the felony to a misdemeanor under Penal Code § 17(b), and dismissed under Penal Code § 1203.4.
- Danser administratively appealed CalPERS’s denial; an ALJ issued a proposed decision denying relief, CalPERS adopted it, and the Sacramento County Superior Court denied mandamus and related relief.
- Danser appealed to the Court of Appeal, arguing (1) CalPERS’s action was time-barred, (2) CalPERS lacked jurisdiction to determine forfeiture, and (3) there was no final conviction punishable as a felony (due to suspended sentence, reduction to misdemeanor, and §1203.4 dismissal).
- The Court of Appeal affirmed: Danser forfeited the statute-of-limits argument, CalPERS had authority to decide benefits entitlement, and § 75526 applies because the jury’s felony-punishable guilt became final when appeals concluded despite later reduction/dismissal.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Timeliness / statute of limitations | CalPERS’ forfeiture action was time-barred (action initiated when CalPERS filed statement of issues 6/16/2010) | Danser did not present legal analysis or raise the issue administratively; prior administrative steps occurred earlier | Forfeited: issue not presented with legal analysis and was not raised in administrative hearing; appellate review denied |
| CalPERS jurisdiction to decide forfeiture | CalPERS cannot interpret or adjudicate criminal-law questions about conviction/finality | CalPERS is empowered to administer JRS II and determine members’ entitlement to benefits; it may interpret retirement law to decide forfeiture | CalPERS acted within its authority to interpret retirement law and determine forfeiture |
| Finality / effect of suspended sentence, §17(b) reduction, §1203.4 dismissal | No final conviction punishable as felony because sentence was suspended, felony later reduced to misdemeanor (§17(b)), and charges dismissed (§1203.4) | §75526 looks to whether judge was found guilty of an offense punishable as a felony and whether that finding of guilt became final (finality occurs at end of appeals). Later reduction or dismissal does not erase the final finding of guilt for purposes of forfeiture | Held: conviction was final when appeals concluded; the offense was punishable as a felony at time of conviction; later reduction/dismissal did not undo civil consequence of forfeiture under §75526 |
Key Cases Cited
- People v. Howard, 16 Cal.4th 1081 (explains consequences of suspension of imposition of sentence for appealability)
- Padilla v. State Personnel Bd., 8 Cal.App.4th 1136 (finality of conviction for administrative consequences)
- In re Phillips, 17 Cal.2d 55 (conviction finality principles)
- Metropolitan Water Dist. v. Superior Court, 32 Cal.4th 491 (agency authority to determine entitlement to public-employee benefits)
- People v. Park, 56 Cal.4th 782 (effect of §17(b) wobbler reduction on subsequent criminal-sentencing consequences)
- Rusheen v. Drews, 99 Cal.App.4th 279 (wobbler reduction does not eliminate civil consequences tied to crimes punishable as felonies)
- Gebremicael v. California Com. on Teacher Credentialing, 118 Cal.App.4th 1477 (distinguishing statutes that apply to persons convicted of a felony from those referring to crimes punishable as felonies)
- People v. Holman, 214 Cal.App.4th 1438 (§1203.4 relief does not literally expunge conviction for all purposes)
- People v. Lewis, 146 Cal.App.4th 294 (nature and effect of §1203.4 dismissal)
- Stephens v. Toomey, 51 Cal.2d 864 (context on collateral effects and restoration of civil rights post-conviction)