CA: CDCR Asks CA Supreme Court to Review Prop. 57 Decision


The CA Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (CDCR) filed today with the CA Supreme Court a petition requesting review of ACSOL’s successful challenge of CDCR’s regulations that prohibit all registrants from early parole consideration.  The prohibition in CDCR’s regulations has been found to be unlawful by several appellate courts.

In its petition, CDCR acknowledges that the Court has already granted review of a similar case, In re Gadlin, S254599.  CDCR therefore requests that the Court defer action in the ACSOL case until the Gadlin case is decided.  All documents in that case have been filed, including an amicus brief by ACSOL, however, the Court has not yet scheduled oral argument.

“We are looking forward to a final and positive disposition of our case,” stated ACSOL Executive Director Janice Bellucci.  “Until the Court rules on this issue, however, thousands of registrants will continue to lose the right to early consideration for parole provided to them by Proposition 57.”

The Court of Appeal, Third District, ruled on February 13, 2020, that CDCR’s regulations were unlawful because Proposition 57 did not include an exception for individuals convicted of a sex offense.  The Court then upheld the trial court’s decision issued on March 5, 2018.

In addition to In re Gadlin, the CA Supreme Court has granted review of six similar cases: In re Mohammad, S259999; In re Adams, S257081; In re Bertram, B293475, In re Bowell, S255066; In re Jones, S259606 and In re Schuster, S260024.

Download the petition for review:

Prop 57 Petition for Review – CA Sup Ct – March 2020

Related posts

Notify of

We welcome a lively discussion with all view points - keeping in mind...


  1. Submissions must be in English
  2. Your submission will be reviewed by one of our volunteer moderators. Moderating decisions may be subjective.
  3. Please keep the tone of your comment civil and courteous. This is a public forum.
  4. Swear words should be starred out such as f*k and s*t and a**
  5. Please avoid the use of derogatory labels.  Always use person-first language.
  6. Please stay on topic - both in terms of the organization in general and this post in particular.
  7. Please refrain from general political statements in (dis)favor of one of the major parties or their representatives.
  8. Please take personal conversations off this forum.
  9. We will not publish any comments advocating for violent or any illegal action.
  10. We cannot connect participants privately - feel free to leave your contact info here. You may want to create a new / free, readily available email address that are not personally identifiable.
  11. Please refrain from copying and pasting repetitive and lengthy amounts of text.
  12. Please do not post in all Caps.
  13. If you wish to link to a serious and relevant media article, legitimate advocacy group or other pertinent web site / document, please provide the full link. No abbreviated / obfuscated links. Posts that include a URL may take considerably longer to be approved.
  14. We suggest to compose lengthy comments in a desktop text editor and copy and paste them into the comment form
  15. We will not publish any posts containing any names not mentioned in the original article.
  16. Please choose a short user name that does not contain links to other web sites or identify real people.  Do not use your real name.
  17. Please do not solicit funds
  18. No discussions about weapons
  19. If you use any abbreviation such as Failure To Register (FTR), Person Forced to Register (PFR) or any others, the first time you use it in a thread, please expand it for new people to better understand.
  20. All commenters are required to provide a real email address where we can contact them.  It will not be displayed on the site.
  21. Please send any input regarding moderation or other website issues via email to moderator [at] all4consolaws [dot] org
  22. We no longer post articles about arrests or accusations, only selected convictions. If your comment contains a link to an arrest or accusation article we will not approve your comment.
  23. If addressing another commenter, please address them by exactly their full display name, do not modify their name. 
ACSOL, including but not limited to its board members and agents, does not provide legal advice on this website.  In addition, ACSOL warns that those who provide comments on this website may or may not be legal professionals on whose advice one can reasonably rely.  

Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

I have been on parole now for six years in two weeks. I’ve heard that every year on the anniversary date of your release date from prison that the parole board has a early discharge review. But I have no further info or idea about this. Does this article mean there’s no chance for early parole discharge now?
I was originally sentenced in 2012 to three years parole. Then when I was released April of 2014 from prison I was told due to a new law I had automatic 20 years parole. Then a few months later parole office told me they changed it to ten years. So in two weeks I’ve done six years parole out of supposed ten years which is already double actual time I did in prison. Makes no sense.

@Chris that is terrible. One of the many books I had to get when I was taking my criminal Justice courses was a Thick red book of laws and this sex registry is new to me as I’m sure it is on many on the registry. In many cases justice is blind.
We all seek relief and sometimes I kick myself as I wanted to explain myself in court and while my sister was trying to be some help and saying just go along with them and sign this sand that it was confusing but when they wanted me to sign that I knew I was talking to a gal via the internet that was when I refused and m sister had a fit. That was the straw that broke the camels back.
Governments are crafty in many ways but true vales come out of standing one’s ground. I’m sure many are wrapped up in ordeals like what you describes.

Oops let me clarify again. during the whole ordeal via internet I had ask to talk to them by telephone and my hearing picked up that it wasn’t a teenanger. The police in interrogation keep asking me why I wanted to talk to them and I keep saying to hear your voice. Sure I had a potty mouth but than they come to me to offer me a plea deal.

Sounds a bit out of character but thats government. One would say its a bit backbiting.