In re Anthony
236 Cal. App. 4th 204
Cal. Ct. App.2015Background
- Obie Anthony was convicted of murder in 1995 and sentenced to life without parole; in 2010 he filed a habeas petition alleging prosecutorial misconduct, false testimony, ineffective assistance, and actual innocence.
- After a 10-day evidentiary hearing, the superior court granted habeas in 2011, finding material false testimony and prosecutorial misconduct, vacating Anthony’s conviction; the People did not appeal and declined to retry, and charges were dismissed.
- In 2013 Anthony filed a compensation claim under Penal Code § 4900 with the Victim Compensation and Government Claims Board; while that claim was pending the Legislature enacted Penal Code § 1485.55.
- Section 1485.55 allows a person who prevailed in habeas proceedings to move the trial court for a finding of factual innocence; if the court so finds, the board must accept that finding and recommend payment without a hearing.
- Anthony moved under § 1485.55(b) for a judicial finding of factual innocence (relying on the habeas record); the trial court granted the motion, applying the preponderance standard and finding Anthony factually innocent.
- The district attorney appealed, arguing (1) § 1485.55 does not apply retroactively to Anthony’s habeas-based claim and (2) insufficient evidence supported factual innocence. The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal for lack of jurisdiction, holding the People have no statutory right to appeal the § 1485.55 order.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (People) | Defendant's Argument (Anthony) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether § 1485.55 applies retroactively to a habeas grant entered before the statute’s enactment | § 1485.55 should not apply to habeas grants issued before the statute took effect | § 1485.55 applies because the § 4900 claim was pending when the statute became effective | Not reached on merits — appeal dismissed for lack of jurisdiction |
| Whether the trial court’s factual-innocence finding is supported by a preponderance of the evidence | The record does not show Anthony is factually innocent | Trial court relied on habeas findings, witness credibility, lack of physical evidence, and Anthony’s credible alibi | Not reached on merits — appeal dismissed for lack of jurisdiction |
| Whether the People may appeal the trial court’s § 1485.55 order under Penal Code § 1238(a)(5) | The order affects the People’s substantial rights by eliminating their right to a contested board hearing on § 4900 compensation | The order is collateral to the criminal case, affects only administrative compensation, and did not alter the vacated judgment or impede prosecution | Appeal not authorized under § 1238(a)(5); dismissed for lack of jurisdiction |
| Whether the People may invoke other appellate provisions (e.g., § 1235 or § 1238(a)(8)) to obtain review | § 1235 permits appeal on pure questions of law; § 1238(a)(8) may apply | § 1235 does not enlarge the People’s categorical right to appeal; § 1238(a)(8) not adequately argued or applicable | No basis shown to invoke those provisions; appeal dismissed |
Key Cases Cited
- People v. Chacon, 40 Cal.4th 558 (2007) (prosecution’s right to appeal in criminal cases is strictly statutory)
- People v. McGuire, 14 Cal.App.4th 687 (1993) (courts cannot expand People’s appeal rights beyond § 1238)
- People v. Leonard, 97 Cal.App.4th 1297 (2002) (orders collateral to the criminal case are not appealable under § 1238(a)(5))
- People v. Garcia, 120 Cal.App.Supp. 767 (1931) (post-judgment collateral orders do not affect People’s substantial rights)
- Tennison v. California Victim Comp. & Government Claims Bd., 152 Cal.App.4th 1164 (2007) (elements and burden for § 4900 administrative claims)
- Diola v. State Board of Control, 135 Cal.App.3d 580 (1982) (claimant bears preponderance burden in board hearings under former § 4900 scheme)
- People v. Adair, 29 Cal.4th 895 (2003) (§ 851.8 factual-innocence judgments are expressly made appealable, illustrating legislative choice)