top of page
Search
Writer's pictureNick Woodall

People v. Strong Conclusion

8/8/2022. California Supreme Court: "We turn, finally, to the application of these principles in this case. Here, a 2014 jury found beyond a reasonable doubt that Strong acted as a major participant with reckless indifference to human life. In 2015, Banks substantially clarified the law surrounding major participant findings. (Banks, supra, 61 Cal.4th at pp. 797–804.) A year later, Clark recited the teachings of Banks on the major participant question and then substantially clarified the relevant considerations for determining whether a defendant has acted with reckless indifference to human life. (Clark, supra, 63 Cal.4th at pp. 611–623.) For reasons we have explained, unless a defendant was tried after Banks was decided, a major participant finding will not defeat an otherwise valid prima facie case. And unless a defendant was tried after Clark was decided, a reckless indifference to human life finding will not defeat an otherwise valid prima facie case. Because Strong’s case was tried before both Banks and Clark, the special circumstance findings do not preclude him from making out a prima facie case for resentencing under section 1172.6. The trial court and Court of Appeal erred in concluding otherwise. We reverse the judgment of the Court of Appeal and remand for further proceedings not inconsistent with this opinion."




47 views0 comments

Recent Posts

See All

Comentarios


bottom of page