A Superior Court judge has denied the demurrer filed by the CA Dept. of Corrections and Rehabilitation (CDCR) and canceled the hearing on that topic which was scheduled for October 27, 2017. In addition, the judge scheduled a hearing on the merits of the case for February 9, 2018.
“Because the judge did not grant CDCR’s demurrer, we will have the opportunity early next year to present legal arguments regarding how and why CDCR’s emergency regulations implementing Proposition 57 are both invalid and unconstitutional,” stated ACSOL Executive Director Janice Bellucci. “The public is encouraged to attend that hearing.”
The new hearing is scheduled to be held on Friday, February 9, 2018, in Sacramento Superior Court, 720 9th Street, Dept. 44 before Judge Christopher Krueger beginning at 10:30 a.m.
At issue in the case is whether CDCR can lawfully exclude individuals convicted of a sex offense from the potential benefits of Prop. 57 which could shorten an individual’s time in prison. The language of Prop. 57, which the public passed in November 2016, states clearly that anyone convicted of a non-violent offense is eligible for those benefits and does not provide an exception for those convicted of a sex offense.
State law identifies a total of 23 felonies as violent. Of that total, only 9 felonies are also sex offenses.
“There are many sex offenses that state law does not categorize as violent,” stated Bellucci. “These offenses include public indecency due to public urination and teens possessing photos of nude teens.”
According to verified reports, individuals convicted of a sex offense decades ago are being denied the benefits of Prop. 57 despite the fact that they are currently incarcerated for a non-sex offense such as armed robbery or possession of drugs.
Great job Janice!!
Keep at it !!
Great job Janice and team! Fight on!
Great news! Thank you for your continued efforts!
Janice, can you please tell us if these qualifying offenses include convictions for offenses said to be “sexually violent” for reasons only of the victims being under fourteen.
Those morons are gonna get slammed in the court. They have no clue what they’re up against.
Janice thank you I appreciate your fight and I respect what you doing I called and spoke to you one day about trying to be placed on one of your cases that you was falling but you had enough people already and I’m sitting here in Lancaster state prison on a technical violation that they claim that I did not give them my address so I’m doing 25 to life for a address violation and if anybody has a non-violent case I do cuz there’s no victim on my case and prop 57 should fit me in every way I should not be excluded because of failing to register to my address
Is there anywhere to find the demurrer filed by the CA Dept. of Corrections and Rehabilitation that was denied? Thanks.