4 Cal. App. 5th 649
Cal. Ct. App.2016Background
- In 1993 respondents Raul Lopez and Freddie Chacon (both 16 at the time) kidnapped and assaulted a California Youth Authority librarian and stabbed an instructor; they were convicted and sentenced in 1994 to life without possibility of parole (LWOP) plus determinate terms.
- On appeal in 1995 some convictions and determinate terms were modified; the LWOP terms remained in place.
- After Graham v. Florida (2010) (holding LWOP for juveniles in nonhomicide cases unconstitutional), respondents obtained habeas relief and the trial court converted their LWOP sentences to life with parole eligibility; the trial court denied probation.
- In 2012 the Legislature enacted Penal Code §1170(d)(2), creating a petition/recall procedure for defendants who were sentenced to LWOP as juveniles and have served at least 15 years.
- Respondents filed petitions under §1170(d)(2) to recall their original LWOP sentences; trial court recalled the sentences, suspended execution, and granted five years probation. The People appealed, arguing the statute applies only to extant LWOP sentences and thus the court lacked jurisdiction.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Penal Code §1170(d)(2) applies when an original LWOP sentence was earlier modified to a life sentence (post-Graham) | §1170(d)(2) applies only to existing LWOP sentences; once converted to life, the statute is inapplicable | §1170(d)(2) applies because the defendant "was sentenced" to LWOP and met all statutory criteria; applying plain meaning to bar them would punish exercise of constitutional rights | Court held §1170(d)(2) may be applied; respondents were eligible despite prior Graham-based modification |
| Whether respondents forfeited or are disqualified from §1170(d)(2) relief because they earlier sought and obtained Graham relief | By obtaining Graham relief, respondents no longer have LWOP and thus cannot seek recall under the statute | Exercising constitutional rights (Graham) should not preclude later statutory remedies; Legislature did not expressly exclude such defendants | Court held respondents did not forfeit the statutory remedy; denying relief would impermissibly penalize constitutionally protected action |
Key Cases Cited
- Graham v. Florida, 560 U.S. 48 (2010) (Eighth Amendment bars LWOP for juveniles in nonhomicide cases)
- United States v. Goodwin, 457 U.S. 368 (1982) (defendant may not be punished for exercising a protected statutory or constitutional right)
- People v. Jones, 25 Cal.4th 98 (2001) (statutory interpretation reviewed de novo)
- People v. Manzo, 53 Cal.4th 880 (2012) (start with plain meaning but construe statute in context)
- Landrum v. Superior Court, 30 Cal.3d 1 (1981) (statutes are construed in reference to the whole system of law)
- People v. Clayburg, 211 Cal.App.4th 86 (2012) (criticizing rigid textualist approach)
- People v. Chacon, 37 Cal.App.4th 52 (1995) (earlier appeal addressing related convictions and sentencing adjustments)