People v. Gutierrez
58 Cal. 4th 1354
| Cal. | 2014Background
- Two 17-year-old offenders were convicted of special-cistance murder and sentenced to life without parole under Penal Code 190.5(b).
- California courts historically treated 190.5(b) as creating a presumption of LWOP for 16–17-year-olds.
- Miller v. Alabama (2012) held mandatory LWOP for juveniles under 18 violates the Eighth Amendment, prompting review of 190.5(b).
- Court concludes 190.5(b) is discretionary with no presumption in favor of LWOP; courts must consider Miller’s youth-related factors.
- Cases were remanded for resentencing to apply Miller principles; Miller factors must be considered in light of this opinion.
- Statutory recall under 1170(d)(2) does not eliminate the constitutional concerns with a presumption and does not moot remand.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Does 190.5(b) impose a presumption in favor of LWOP for juveniles? | Gutierrez argued Guinn creates a presumption for LWOP. | State argued discretion remains and presumption is permissible. | No presumption; discretion to impose LWOP or 25-to-life without presumption. |
| Does Miller require individualized consideration of youth under 190.5(b)? | Gutierrez argued Miller’s factors must guide sentencing. | State argued Miller factors are implicit in 190.5(b). | Miller factors must guide the court’s discretion under 190.5(b). |
| Is section 190.5(b) constitutionally infirm if interpreted to presuppose LWOP? | Argues presumption conflicts with Miller and Graham. | Argues discretion and Miller factors avoid constitutional concerns. | Constitutional when construed as discretionary with Miller-based consideration. |
| Does 1170(d)(2) cure or avoid Miller concerns about LWOP? | Recall mechanism could provide later relief. | Recall does not validate initial LWOP decision or eliminate Miller concerns. | Recall provision does not erase Miller concerns; remand still required. |
Key Cases Cited
- Guinn v. People, 28 Cal.App.4th 1130 (Cal. Ct. App. 1994) (established presumptive LWOP under 190.5(b) (distinguished later))
- Miller v. Alabama, 567 U.S. 460 (U.S. 2012) (mandatory LWOP for juveniles violates Eighth Amendment; requires individualized sentencing)
- Graham v. Florida, 560 U.S. 48 (U.S. 2010) (juvenile life without parole for nonhomicide offenses prohibited; informs youth factors)
- Roper v. Simmons, 543 U.S. 551 (U.S. 2005) (juveniles have diminished culpability and greater capacity for change)
- Caballero v. Superior Court, 55 Cal.4th 262 (Cal. 2012) (limits aggregate determinate sentences for juvenile nonhomicide offenders; informs Miller factors)
- People v. Leiva, 56 Cal.4th 498 (Cal. 2013) (statutory interpretation with constitutional avoidance; canon of doubt)