In re Kirchner
244 Cal. App. 4th 1398
Cal. Ct. App. 4th2016Background
- Kirchner committed murder at age 16 during a gun-store robbery; LWOP imposed under §190.5(b) for special circ. murder; CYA assessed amenability and recommended juvenile-style treatment; trial court sentenced LWOP in 1994 and retained other counts; Kirchner’s direct appeal failed and his habeas petitions were filed years later; Miller and Gutierrez set rules for retroactivity and youth-centered sentencing considerations; this appeal assesses Montgomery retroactivity and whether §1170(d)(2) provides an adequate remedy in collateral proceedings.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Retroactivity of Miller in collateral review | Kirchner's rights under Miller apply retroactively. | Montgomery allows retroactivity for Miller; but state argued against retroactivity. | Yes, Miller retroactive in collateral proceedings. |
| Adequacy of §1170(d)(2) as Miller remedy | Remedy must implement Miller with retroactivity. | §1170(d)(2) can cure Miller defects in collateral review. | §1170(d)(2) is an adequate remedy. |
| Burden of proof in §1170(d)(2) proceedings | Remedy must permit parole consideration; burden issues unspecified. | People bear burden to prove incorrigibility. | People bear burden at all stages of §1170(d)(2) petitions. |
| Consistency with Gutierrez and other precedents | Gutierrez is not controlling in Montgomery collateral context. | Montgomery retroactivity and §1170(d)(2) alignment do not conflict with Gutierrez. | No conflict; Montgomery retroactivity and §1170(d)(2) remedy align with Gutierrez. |
Key Cases Cited
- Miller v. Alabama, 567 U.S. ---- (U.S. 2012) (mandatory LWOP for juveniles violates Eighth Amendment; youth factors required)
- Montgomery v. Louisiana, --- U.S. ---- (U.S. 2015) (retroactive application of Miller; alternative parole/remand remedies permissible)
- Gutierrez v. People, 58 Cal.4th 1354 (Cal. 2014) (California law on LWOP and Miller; prospective focus on direct appeals; issues with cure by §190.5(d))
- Guinn v. People, 28 Cal.App.4th 1130 (Cal. App. 1994) (interpretation of §190.5(b) creating presumptions favoring LWOP)
- Chavez v. Superior Court, 228 Cal.App.4th 18 (Cal. App. 2014) (regarding Miller and Gutierrez implications)
- Teague v. Lane, 489 U.S. 289 (U.S. 1989) (frontiers on retroactivity of new constitutional rules)