Welcome to the Prison Talk Online Community! Take a Minute and Sign Up Today!






Go Back   Prison Talk > U.S. REGIONAL FORUMS > CALIFORNIA > California Legal Help
Register Entertainment FAQ Calendar Mark Forums Read

California Legal Help Topics, Discussions and Information relating to Legal Information specific to the State of California. This information is *NOT PROFESSIONAL* and should always be fact-checked!

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #26  
Old 09-30-2017, 12:53 PM
miamac's Avatar
miamac miamac is offline
Site Moderator Gone Mad

Staff Superstar Winner PTO Site Moderator 

 

Join Date: May 2013
Location: ORnativeAZresCAtied
Posts: 7,990
Thanks: 10,260
Thanked 13,372 Times in 5,181 Posts
Default

My computer is being wonky and I can't open multiple tabs so I may have to update this later. We have a thread on this bill, but I'm not able to locate (stupid comp...grrr). Will merge when I can.

My understanding is that the bill is intended to remove the requirement that a judge enforcement gun enhancements going forward. That means they can use it, but it's at their discretion.

For people already serving a gun enhancement, you would need to be resentenced in order for this to apply. That means re-opening your case with substantial evidence that would give a judge the incentive to remove the enhancement.

I imagine PLO will have a publication available with helpful information as soon as it's finalized. I will keep my eyes open.

Here is the bill progress regarding votes and noting that it went to the gov's desk.

edit: merged
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to miamac For This Useful Post:
marie8899 (09-30-2017)
Sponsored Links
  #27  
Old 09-30-2017, 09:01 PM
marie8899 marie8899 is offline
Registered User
 

Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: California, U.S.A.
Posts: 930
Thanks: 3,385
Thanked 1,001 Times in 470 Posts
Default

Thank you and please update us when you can. I was just wondering today whether I will need to see a lawyer if the Gov signs. However, I did write Gov Brown and encourage others to write him, too, regarding this bill.


Quote:
Originally Posted by miamac View Post
My computer is being wonky and I can't open multiple tabs so I may have to update this later. We have a thread on this bill, but I'm not able to locate (stupid comp...grrr). Will merge when I can.

My understanding is that the bill is intended to remove the requirement that a judge enforcement gun enhancements going forward. That means they can use it, but it's at their discretion.

For people already serving a gun enhancement, you would need to be resentenced in order for this to apply. That means re-opening your case with substantial evidence that would give a judge the incentive to remove the enhancement.

I imagine PLO will have a publication available with helpful information as soon as it's finalized. I will keep my eyes open.

Here is the bill progress regarding votes and noting that it went to the gov's desk.

edit: merged
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 09-30-2017, 09:31 PM
miamac's Avatar
miamac miamac is offline
Site Moderator Gone Mad

Staff Superstar Winner PTO Site Moderator 

 

Join Date: May 2013
Location: ORnativeAZresCAtied
Posts: 7,990
Thanks: 10,260
Thanked 13,372 Times in 5,181 Posts
Default

I haven't found anything more up to date regarding retro-activity, but here is a concise description of the bill's intent:

"SB 620 affects the “Use a Gun and You’re Done Law” by allowing a court to apply the longer sentences on a case-by-case basis. The enhancements would remain in place.

Studies of these enhancements show that increasing an already long sentence does not deter crime. According to Bradford SB 620 does not get into that debate because it does not eliminate the enhancements. Nor does it suggest a judge should disregard enhancements. Judges should consider the circumstances of the crime and the history of the perpetrator and deal with the individual appropriately. This moves the decision about sentencing from one that is rigid and without meaningful consideration to one that is specific to the circumstances of the case."
source
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 10-02-2017, 08:20 PM
Angybby Angybby is offline
Registered User
 

Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: Ca . USA
Posts: 4
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Unhappy gun enhancement form and sentence reduction

does anyone happen to know how i can obtain a copy of those forms>?
the gun enhancement reduction and sentence reduction and what the number on the form is. please and thank you!
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 10-02-2017, 08:28 PM
missingdee's Avatar
missingdee missingdee is offline
She's Home! Moderator

PTO Moderator 

 

Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Metro Los Angeles, CA, USA
Posts: 2,537
Thanks: 2,780
Thanked 3,660 Times in 1,564 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Angybby View Post
does anyone happen to know how i can obtain a copy of those forms>?

the gun enhancement reduction and sentence reduction and what the number on the form is. please and thank you!


Sentence Reduction is at the discretion of the sentencing judge. I don’t believe there is a formal form for it. Unless you are talking about sentence reduction for a theft or drug charge as allowed in certain circumstances under Penal Code 1170.18.

There is no such thing as a gun enhancement reduction. This is a sentencing decision at the discretion of the judge (can be recommended by the DA at sentencing.)

Because a gun enhancement, to the best of my knowledge, makes a felony qualify as violent under Penal code 667.5(c), it is unlikely that a judge will reduce a sentence that involves a gun enhancement.

If the concern is a wrongful conviction at trial then you need to speak to an appellate attorney, or he needs to file an appeal and have one appointed. DO NOT attempt to file an appeal yourself.
__________________
The Colorblind Moderator (I'm not even going to try to use green down here, I'll embarass myself! LOL!) Currently assisting in all forums and actively monitoring Wives and Girlfriends in Prison and the California forums.

#ByeCDCR #TimesUp #HomeForChristmas
Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to missingdee For This Useful Post:
Hurley123 (10-02-2017), miamac (10-02-2017)
  #31  
Old 10-02-2017, 10:06 PM
miamac's Avatar
miamac miamac is offline
Site Moderator Gone Mad

Staff Superstar Winner PTO Site Moderator 

 

Join Date: May 2013
Location: ORnativeAZresCAtied
Posts: 7,990
Thanks: 10,260
Thanked 13,372 Times in 5,181 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Angybby View Post
does anyone happen to know how i can obtain a copy of those forms>?
the gun enhancement reduction and sentence reduction and what the number on the form is. please and thank you!
I've merged your thread with the existing SB 620 thread.

This not a case of applying for reduction via a form. This is, when it leaves the governor's desk, an opportunity for judges to use greater discretion in sentencing involving a firearm. The potential for retroactive resentencing is murky, at best. We don't know that previously sentenced inmates will benefit greatly from this change. If they do, it will be a process of taking your charges back to court and arguing that the enhancement is excessive and without furtherance of justice. That's a very steep hill to climb.

The rumor mill around 620 is already whipped up and running. This is the third bit I've read on it today. A gentle reminder to our loved ones and to those outside assisting them that when documentation (for example a guide from PLO) is available, we will post and we implore that you send a copy to those inside to share. Accurate information is helpful information.
Reply With Quote
  #32  
Old 10-03-2017, 08:38 AM
gvalliant gvalliant is offline
Registered User
 

Join Date: Sep 2015
Location: Costa Mesa, California, USA
Posts: 388
Thanks: 659
Thanked 750 Times in 317 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by miamac View Post
The rumor mill around 620 is already whipped up and running........Accurate information is helpful information.
And innacurate information is damaging information. SB620 is not law. Yet. It has passed Senate and Assembly and is on the Governors desk. He can sign, not sign, or veto. He has till about the middle of this month to do one of those 3 things. If he vetoes there is nothing more to discuss or think about. If he signs - or does not sign - it will become law. The law will become effective Jan 1 so nothing can happen till then.

It eliminates nothing. It reduces nothing. It provides a judge discretion to waive or dismiss the gun enhancement at sentencing. Judges have never been able to do that before. Judges have had that discretion with other enhancements so this brings all gun enhancements in line with many others. The judge can do it in "the interest of justice" so there has to be a reason that the judge can justify. I'm guessing this will be rare because it exposes the judge to consequences if he does not have powerful justification. Think the Brock Turner Stanford rape case and what is happening with that judge.

It is primarily to the benefit of new cases. It is not retroactive. Except that it can be applied in a resentencing. The wording of the bill makes it clear you cannot get a new hearing based on just the fact you received this sentence, even if the judge "did not want to impose the enhancement". Senator Bradford (author) and Assemblymember Weber (proponent) made that clear in their Senate and Assembly testimony. You must find something else wrong with the case or sentencing to get back into court.

Dee and Mia are warning about re-opening a case. And making sure you get a lawyer if you are thinking about this. There is nothing in the bill that says the judge will strike the enhancement nor is there anything in the bill that says the judge can't increase the sentence. I'm betting you could face a pissed off DA and victims and who knows what else.

Door number 1 - Judge strikes the enhancement. Congratulations. Big benefit.

Door number 2 - Judge does not strike. Nothing lost.

Door number 3 - Judge does not strike the enhancement. Increases term of initial sentences. Maybe they were minimums and now imposes mid-term or maximum. Or maybe it was a plea and DA takes away plea and adds back all those dropped charges that get added to the sentence. Thank you for playing "Dismiss or Consequences"!

I strongly agree with the advise already given about waiting for more analysis by a group like PLO so we have reliable, accurate information and with the advise re getting a lawyer to help if you choose to pursue this.
Reply With Quote
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to gvalliant For This Useful Post:
miamac (10-03-2017), missingdee (10-03-2017), Patrickj (10-03-2017)
  #33  
Old 10-07-2017, 07:17 PM
Dawn V Dawn V is offline
Registered User
 

Join Date: Oct 2017
Location: California, Tulare
Posts: 2
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default

When i spoke to the ombudsman for my husbands institution she told me that when it is signed and the inmate goes for his yearly they have to recalculate the time. Anyone else hear of this?
Reply With Quote
  #34  
Old 10-07-2017, 07:32 PM
miamac's Avatar
miamac miamac is offline
Site Moderator Gone Mad

Staff Superstar Winner PTO Site Moderator 

 

Join Date: May 2013
Location: ORnativeAZresCAtied
Posts: 7,990
Thanks: 10,260
Thanked 13,372 Times in 5,181 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dawn V View Post
When i spoke to the ombudsman for my husbands institution she told me that when it is signed and the inmate goes for his yearly they have to recalculate the time. Anyone else hear of this?
No, that's highly inaccurate and really irresponsible of them to say given that law interpretation isn't in their job description. I'm sorry you were told that. :/

The text of the bill can be read here, but in short:

"This bill would delete the prohibition on striking an allegation or finding and, instead, would allow a court, in the interest of justice and at the time of sentencing or resentencing, to strike or dismiss an enhancement otherwise required to be imposed by the above provisions of law."


Reply With Quote
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to miamac For This Useful Post:
gvalliant (10-08-2017), missingdee (10-08-2017), Patrickj (10-08-2017)
  #35  
Old 10-08-2017, 04:11 PM
Patrickj's Avatar
Patrickj Patrickj is offline
Moderator

PTO Moderator 

 

Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Atwater CA. USA.
Posts: 2,269
Thanks: 1,409
Thanked 1,516 Times in 755 Posts
Default

There is nothing in this bill even close to that. This is someone that should really not be given out such false information. Please do us all a favor and email this person The bill as it is written. Damn shame someone in a position like that to be saying such garbage.
__________________
Be a friend to everyone,never know when you may need their help

Last edited by Patrickj; 10-08-2017 at 04:46 PM..
Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Patrickj For This Useful Post:
miamac (10-10-2017), missingdee (10-08-2017)
  #36  
Old 10-11-2017, 06:34 PM
miamac's Avatar
miamac miamac is offline
Site Moderator Gone Mad

Staff Superstar Winner PTO Site Moderator 

 

Join Date: May 2013
Location: ORnativeAZresCAtied
Posts: 7,990
Thanks: 10,260
Thanked 13,372 Times in 5,181 Posts
Default

Brown signed SB620 today and it is active.

You can find the the full text of the bill here.
Reply With Quote
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to miamac For This Useful Post:
KobeDeuce (10-11-2017), missingdee (10-12-2017), Patrickj (10-11-2017)
  #37  
Old 10-16-2017, 07:28 PM
Niner1 Niner1 is offline
Registered User
 

Join Date: May 2010
Location: ca, usa
Posts: 6
Thanks: 0
Thanked 3 Times in 3 Posts
Default Prop 64 to resentencing gun enhancement

So prop 64 is retroactive and allows petition of the court to resentence a felony to a misdemeanor. At the same time anyone know if possible to ask for resentencing on gun enhancement ? Seems like the exact scenario and why they include resentencing in the text of the bill
Reply With Quote
  #38  
Old 10-16-2017, 10:07 PM
Patrickj's Avatar
Patrickj Patrickj is offline
Moderator

PTO Moderator 

 

Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Atwater CA. USA.
Posts: 2,269
Thanks: 1,409
Thanked 1,516 Times in 755 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Niner1 View Post
So prop 64 is retroactive and allows petition of the court to resentence a felony to a misdemeanor. At the same time anyone know if possible to ask for resentencing on gun enhancement ? Seems like the exact scenario and why they include resentencing in the text of the bill



Prop. 64 list which felonies may be reduced to a misdemeanor Prop.64 does not apply to all felony sentencing, only those that were changed by Prop 64. Plus Prop. 64 was retroactive. I do not see any where in this new law where that is written about being retroactive
You need a different challenge to your sentence then just the gun enhancement. If you can get back into court under some kind of other sentencing error, or trial error. Where new sentencing will apply this new law may play in to the new sentencing. Just to petition the court under inappropriate sentencing do to changes in the law will get you no where. Key factor in this new law the judge may still decide to follow 10,20. life sentencing guidelines or not This give the judge to power to decide, not the D.A.
__________________
Be a friend to everyone,never know when you may need their help
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Patrickj For This Useful Post:
miamac (10-18-2017)
  #39  
Old 10-16-2017, 10:19 PM
Niner1 Niner1 is offline
Registered User
 

Join Date: May 2010
Location: ca, usa
Posts: 6
Thanks: 0
Thanked 3 Times in 3 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Patrickj View Post
Prop. 64 list which felonies may be reduced to a misdemeanor Prop.64 does not apply to all felony sentencing, only those that were changed by Prop 64. Plus Prop. 64 was retroactive. I do not see any where in this new law where that is written about being retroactive
You need a different challenge to your sentence then just the gun enhancement. If you can get back into court under some kind of other sentencing error, or trial error. Where new sentencing will apply this new law may play in to the new sentencing. Just to petition the court under inappropriate sentencing do to changes in the law will get you no where. Key factor in this new law the judge may still decide to follow 10,20. life sentencing guidelines or not This give the judge to power to decide, not the D.A.
In my scenario there was a conviction for possesion for sale of pot which is now eligible to be resentenced as a misdemeanor at the same time there was a another conviction with gun enhancement ... since we can go back for resentencing on the prop 64 covered offense can't we ask for resentencing on the gun enhancement at the same time ... isn't that the reason for th "resentencing pursuant to any other law" otherwise what does that wording in the bill mean?
Reply With Quote
  #40  
Old 10-18-2017, 08:27 AM
gvalliant gvalliant is offline
Registered User
 

Join Date: Sep 2015
Location: Costa Mesa, California, USA
Posts: 388
Thanks: 659
Thanked 750 Times in 317 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Niner1 View Post
In my scenario there was a conviction for possesion for sale of pot which is now eligible to be resentenced as a misdemeanor at the same time there was a another conviction with gun enhancement ... since we can go back for resentencing on the prop 64 covered offense can't we ask for resentencing on the gun enhancement at the same time ... isn't that the reason for th "resentencing pursuant to any other law" otherwise what does that wording in the bill mean?
This is another example of needing a lawyer. Your scenario (prop 64) is, as you point out, a mechanism for resentencing. It has nothing to do with error in sentencing or error in trial as Patrick points out. The possession charge is not tied to the gun enhancement, the "other charge" is. I don't know whether anyone can really tell you right now if this can apply to SB620. It is not a straightforward situation and a brand new law. I would sure ask a lawyer for help.

If a lawyer is successful using your scenario that is only half the job. Per the bill (soon to be law) you need to provide the judge compelling reason it would be in the interest of justice to strike the enhancement. Something else to discuss with your lawyer.
Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to gvalliant For This Useful Post:
miamac (10-18-2017), Patrickj (10-18-2017)
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Previous life, current life, future life... cristinas Husbands & Boyfriends in Prison 1 04-19-2013 12:58 PM
Experience of life... Book about life and life in prison... Savannah Florida - Region 2 Facilities 1 09-06-2010 03:57 PM
A Day in the life of hell, that's my life. Sorry it's long stress mode mabear Husbands & Boyfriends in Prison 4 06-24-2003 09:52 PM


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 01:23 PM.
Copyright © 2001- 2017 Prison Talk Online
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Website Design & Custom vBulletin Skins by: Relivo Media
Message Board Statistics