Supreme Court reverses conviction: DA impermissibly vouched for officer’s veracity
People v. Rodriguez, 2020 WL 2563833 (Cal.) (Cal., 2020) Supreme Court of California; S251706; May 21,2020
Summary: The California Supreme Court held that a prosecutor impermissibly vouched for witness credibility by telling the jury in closing argument that two testifying officers would not lie because each would not put his “entire career on the line” or “at risk” and would not subject himself to “possible prosecution for perjury.” The Supreme Court found that the error was prejudicial and reversed the judgment of conviction.
Rodriguez charged with assault on a correctional officer
San Francisco conviction overturned: Warrantless detention is not supported by collective knowledge of police.
Summary:
Defendant was convicted in the Superior Court, San Francisco County, of domestic battery, and he appealed from denial of his motion to suppress evidence.
The Superior Court, Appellate Division, held the State could not rely on “collective knowledge” doctrine to justify the defendant’s warrantless detention. The trial court failure to suppress evidence discovered during an unconstitutional, warrantless stop of defendant was not harmless beyond a reasonable doubt. The conviction was reversed.
Tickets for speeding over 100 mph up 87% during COVID-19 Quarantine; DMV expands online services
The decrease in traffic during the COVID-19 shelter in place, has seen an increase in speeding tickets for driving over 100 mph.
‘From March 19, when the state’s stay-at-home order began, to April 19, the CHP issued 2,493 citations for speeding more than 100 mph, as compared with 1,335 during the same period last year.” (100-mph speeding tickets soar statewide: Gary Richards, Roadshow
https://www.mercurynews.com/2020/04/23/100-mph-speeding-tickets-soar-statewide-roadshow/)
Officer’s failure to give implied consent admonition for a DUI blood test does not make a driver’s voluntary consent invalid
People v. Lopez, 2020 WL 1163518; C080065 (Cal.App. 3 Dist., 2020)
Summary:
Sharon Darlene Lopez appealed the trial court’s denial of her motion to suppress evidence obtained from a warrantless blood draw after her arrest for driving under the influence of a controlled substance. The officer instructed Lopez that she was required to submit to a blood draw under the state’s implied consent law, but he did not provide her with the law’s admonitions regarding the consequences should she refuse the test. Lopez did not object or resist, and the draw was performed without a warrant. The trial court concluded defendant consented to the test. The Court of Appeal concluded that substantial evidence supports the court’s ruling, and affirmed the judgment.
A small amount of marijuana in a sealed container in a car is legal and does not justify a search
People v. Shumake (Cal. App. Dep’t Super. Ct., Dec. 16, 2019, No. 6093) 2019 WL 8128736
Stop by Specialized Dui Patrol Officer: Admission that driver had marijuana in the car
While on specialized DUI patrol Berkeley Police Officer Megan Jones stopped a Hyundai with no front license plate, a violation of Vehicle Code Section 5200. Officer Jones testified that she stops cars for traffic violations, to see if the driver might be impaired. She testified that Shumake’s driving was normal, and that he immediately and safely pulled to the curb when she activated her lights and siren, and that he was cooperative. Officer Jones testified that she has conducted about 800 DUI investigations, with about 500 involving marijuana.
Great Bodily Injury Defined
People v. Medellin (Cal. Ct. App., Feb. 20, 2020, No. F076022) 2020 WL 830758
The Court of Appeal reversed Samuel Medellin’s convictions for assault with force likely to cause great bodily injury, and their accompanying enhancements for inflicting great bodily injury. The Court found that the prosecutor prejudicially misstated the law during closing arguments. The Court found fault in the CALCRIM instructions defining great bodily injury and reversed the convictions
The incident and the injuries to the vcitims
Murder conviction must be reversed where jury relied on impermissible theory to convict
People v. Wear (Cal. Ct. App., Feb. 4, 2020, No. A152732) 2020 WL 549310
FACTS: Defendant James Wear and his friend, Brandon Lowell, arranged to meet an acquaintance, Ryan Rossknecht. Wear intended to buy or steal a gun from Rossknecht and possibly to supply him with heroin. During the meeting, an argument erupted and Rossknecht, who had two guns with him, shot Lowell once with one of them. Wear, who was unarmed, then seized that gun, shot Rossknecht twice with it, and fled with the other gun. Lowell and Rossknecht died of their injuries.
Wear was charged with the murders of both Lowell and Rossknecht. The jury was unable to return a verdict on Lowell’s murder. But the jury found Wear guilty of first degree murder and found true an allegation that Wear personally and intentionally discharged a firearm causing the death of Rossknecht. The jury was unable to return a verdict on a special-circumstance allegation that Wear murdered Rossknecht during a robbery. After Wear admitted two prior convictions, one of which was a strike, the trial court sentenced him to 80 years to life in prison.
Driving carefully while being observed by the police is not grounds for a traffic stop
People v. Mendoza, 2020 WL 562981 (Cal.App. 4 Dist., 2020)
Conviction for transporting cocaine reversed because of no reasonable suspicion to detain
Facts: Blanca Luna Mendoza was convicted of transporting for sale more than four kilograms of cocaine based on evidence a U.S. Customs and Border Protection agent acquired after a traffic stop on Interstate 15. Mendoza argued that the agent did not have reasonable suspicion she was engaged in criminal activity when he stopped her and the evidence should be excluded.
SB 1437 hearings in SF Superior Court Dept 25
Thomas Keel will have his 1987 conviction for Second Degree Murder vacated after San Francisco Assistant Deputy District Attorney Allison Macbeth stipulated that Mr. Keel was eligible for re-sentencing under SB 1437, at a hearing in San Francisco Superior Court held on February 7, 2009. Superior Court Judge Brendan Conroy will re-sentence Mr. Keel on February 21, 2020 to a residential robbery or burglary. At that time, Mr. Keel’s conviction for a second-degree murder, to which he pled guilty in a joint-deal with his co-defendant Ronnie Wingfield, will be vacated.
Re-sentencing under Penal Code section 1170.95
Penal Code section 1170.95, subdivision (a) provides that , a person convicted of first degree or second degree murder under a theory of “felony murder or under the natural and probable consequences theory may file a petition with the court that sentenced the petitioner to have petitioner’s murder conviction vacated and to be re-sentenced on any remaining counts.”
San Francisco Criminal Lawyer Blog






