In re Rodriguez, 122 Cal. Rptr. 3d 691

Rodriguez was convicted of first-degree murder in 1985 and sentenced to 25 years to life.
Board of Parole Hearings granted Rodriguez parole on November 13, 2008; Governor reversed on April 19, 2009.
Governor relied on four grounds: heinousness of the offense, inconsistent statements, lack of insight, and limited self-help/therapy.
Superior Court granted habeas corpus relief February 24, 2010, reinstating the Board’s parole grant.
Attorney General appealed; issue centered on whether Governor’s reversal had “some evidence” and proper remedy.
Court affirms; Governor’s reversal vacated and Board’s parole reinstated; remand to Governor rejected.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether there is “some evidence” to support the Governor’s reversal.	Rodriguez	Rodriguez lacked some evidence for unsuitability	Yes, there is some evidence (insufficient link between findings)
Whether lack of insight can justify current dangerousness based on the record.	Rodriguez	Governor relied on lack of insight	No, lack of insight alone did not establish current dangerousness
Whether the remedy should be remand or immediate release.	Rodriguez	Remand appropriate	Remand not proper; remedy is reinstatement of Board’s parole and vacatur of Governor’s reversal

In re Lazor, 172 Cal.App.4th 1185 (Cal. Ct. App. 2009) (appeal standard for habeas parole relief where only documentary evidence is used)
In re Rosenkrantz, 29 Cal.4th 616 (Cal. 2002) (some evidence standard; deferential review of Governor’s decision)
In re Shaputis, 44 Cal.4th 1241 (Cal. 2005) (new talisman of lack of insight; factors for lack of insight tied to current dangerousness)
In re Dannenberg, 34 Cal.4th 1061 (Cal. 2005) (offense gravity and rehabilitation balance; lack of current danger must be shown with nexus to record)
Lawrence, 44 Cal.4th 1181 (Cal. 2005) (parole denials after Board; some evidence sufficient; de novo Governor review allowed)