Skip navigation
CLN bookstore

Articles by David Reutter

Ohio Supreme Court Announces Self-Defense Jury Instruction Does Not Require Intent to Harm or Kill Assailant

by David M. Reutter

The Supreme Court of Ohio held that a defendant need not “intend to harm or kill another person to be entitled to a self-defense jury instruction.” The Court found error in the lower courts’ ruling otherwise and concluded the defendant’s counsel was ineffective for failing to ...

California Court of Appeal: In SB 483, Legislature Intended to Prohibit Prosecution Withdrawing Plea Agreement for Any Sentence Reduction in § 1172.75 Resentencing Hearing, Even Reductions Based on Code Provisions Not Enacted by SB 483—Deepening Split in

by David M. Reutter

The Court of Appeal of California, First District, Division Three, held a trial court erred by failing to hold a resentencing hearing in the defendant’s presence after granting a motion to strike enhancements for prior prison sentences (“prison priors”). The Court further concluded that a prosecutor ...

Kansas Supreme Court Severs ‘Noisy Conduct’ Law as Unconstitutionally Overbroad

by David M. Reutter

The Supreme Court of Kansas ruled that the “noisy conduct” provision in a Wichita ordinance is unconstitutionally overbroad under the First Amendment. The Court severed the provision from the constitutional “fighting words” provision in the same subsection.

Before the Court was the appeal of Gabrielle Griffie, ...

Tenth Circuit: Counsel Advising Black Defendant No Minorities Would Be on Jury Is Material Misrepresentation About Right to Impartial Jury Rendering Guilty Plea Unknowing and Involuntary

by David M. Reutter

T

he U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit held a defendant’s guilty plea was unknowing and involuntary due to trial counsel’s misrepresentation that all minorities would be removed from the jury, resulting in a trial before exclusively white jurors. The case was remanded to ...

California Court of Appeal Explains Qualification for Mental Health Diversion Under Pen. Code § 1001.36, Rules Defendant Qualified for Pretrial Mental Health Diversion

by David M. Reutter

 

The Court of Appeal of California, Fourth Appellate District, issued a writ of mandate directing a trial court to grant a defendant’s request for mental health diversion. At issue was the application of Stats. 2018, ch. 1005, which recognizes that incarceration of certain persons with ...

First Circuit: Defendant Did Not Understand Consequences of Guilty Plea Because District Court and Counsel Led Him to Reasonably Believed Plea Agreement Would Result in Sentence Below Applicable Mandatory Minimum

by David M. Reutter

 

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit vacated a defendant’s guilty plea because it was entered without an understanding of the consequences. The basis for the Court’s ruling rested upon the U.S. District Court for the District of Puerto Rico and plea agreement indicating an award for prison credit on a state charge for which the defendant could not, and did not, receive due to mandatory sentencing provisions.

Before the Court was the appeal of Samuel Arce-Ayala, who pleaded guilty to federal charges for conspiring to possess with the intent to distribute controlled substances and possessing a firearm in furtherance of a drug trafficking crime. “Arce-Ayala was a leader, drug point owner, and enforcer for ‘Los Menores,’ a violent drug trafficking organization in Puerto Rico,” the Court wrote.

Five years before his 2017 federal indictment, Arce-Ayala was convicted in the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico on two counts of attempted second-degree murder and three firearm offenses that involved Los Menores activities. Arce-Ayala was sentenced to eight years imprisonment for those convictions. Under the federal plea agreement, Arce-Ayala agreed to plead guilty to the two charged offenses in return for a sentence both parties would ...

California Court of Appeal: Petitioner Has Constitutional Right to Be Present at Evidentiary Hearing Under Felony Murder Resentencing Law

by David M. Reutter

The Court of Appeal of California, Fourth District, held that a violation of a prisoner’s constitutional and statutory rights to be personally present at an evidentiary hearing to determine if Senate Bill 1437 prohibits him from being charged with felony murder. Finding the error was not ...

Criminal Justice Reform Becoming a Corporate Priority

by David M. Reutter

With the rate of Americans who have a felony conviction steadily increasing as a result of the incarcerative state’s policies, corporate entities are experiencing a change of heart towards those with criminal records. In fact, many corporations say felons are often the most dependable, loyal, and ...

Electronic Monitoring: An Alternative to Incarceration or a Troubling Extension of Punishment?

by David M. Reutter

It is often said that life imitates art. When it comes to electronic monitoring (“EM”), your friendly, neighborhood Spiderman was a major influence for the idea to use an electronic device to track the location of persons entangled within the criminal justice and immigration systems. The ...

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court Announces Constructive Denial of Right to Counsel Where Defense Counsel Sleeps for Significant Portion or During Important Aspect of Trial

by David M. Reutter

In a case of first impression, the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court held that “a defendant constructively is deprived of his or her constitutional right to counsel under art. 12 [of the Massachusetts Declaration of Rights] where trial counsel sleeps for a significant portion of during an ...

 

 

Disciplinary Self-Help Litigation Manual - Side
PLN Subscribe Now Ad 450x450
Disciplinary Self-Help Litigation Manual - Side