Criminal Appeal

Cal. Supreme Court Activity.

No conference Thanksgiving week.

The prior week, the Court granted review, but deferred briefing, in People v. Ochoa, no. S128417, which presented both Blakely and Crawford issues.

The court also granted review, but deferred briefing, in In re Cortinas, S127439, in which the Court of Appeal had reversed an order granting habeas relief in connection with a parole suitability hearing. Briefing is deferred pending In re Dannanberg, S111029 which was argued on Nov. 4.

Finally, the Court also granted OSC's in two capital habeas proceedings: In re Bolden, S099231 and In re Valdez, S107508.

Habeas Denial Reversed; Exclusion of Co-Perp's Out-of-Court Statement Violated Due Process: In Chia v. Cambra, no. 99-56361, a habeas case decided under the deferential AEDPA standard of review (28 U.S.C. 2254(d)), the Ninth Circuit held, today, that the state trial court's exclusion of a co-perpetrator's statement exonerating the defendant constituted an objectively unreasonable application of federal constitutional law as determined by the U.S. Supreme Court. Senior Judge Dorothy Nelson authored the majority opinion, which Judge Alex Kozinski joined.

Senior Judge Melvin Brunetti dissented, concluding that the co-perpetrator's out-of-court statement was not sufficiently reliable such that the defendant's due process rights were violated. Judge Brunetti agreed that, "[t]he majority has correctly identified a rule of clearly established federal law which allows hearsay statements against interest to be admitted into evidence when the statements bear 'persuasive assurances of trustworthiness' and are crucial to the defense."

The court had previously reached the same result in an earlier published decision. After the state petitioned for certiorari, the Supreme Court vacated the earlier decision and remanded for reconsideration in light of Lockyer v. Andrade, 538 U.S. 63 (2003).