Appellate Law & Practice

This blog is devoted to appellate law and will provide case summaries and links to articles on appellate advocacy. Please send your news and views to Appellate [at] gmail [dot] com. We also welcome new contributors. Email us if you are interested.

Thursday, November 04, 2004

California (11.4.2004)

In People v. Briceno, S117641, the high court held that “any felony offense” that was committed for the benefit of a criminal street gang is a “serious felony” within the meaning of California’s three-strikes law. Consequently, the defendant’s two prior convictions—one for unlawful possession of a firearm by a felon for the benefit of a criminal street gang and another for carrying a concealed firearm for the benefit of a criminal street gang—can be counted as two strikes, “consistent with the voters’ intent to dramatically increase the penalties for all gang-related felony offenses.”

The court in McClung v. Employment Div. Dep't, S121568, held that a change in California law making nonsupervisory coworkers personally liable for sexual harassment is not retroactive. Ms. McClung filed a complaint against her employer and a coworker, Mr. Lopez, alleging claims of hostile work environment and failure to remedy a hostile work environment. The Court of Appeal affirmed summary judgment for the employer but, applying the amended law retroactively to Mr. Lopez, denied his motion for summary judgment.

In reversing, the California Supreme Court quoted the esteemed words of Chief Justice John Marshall: “It is, emphatically, the province and duty of the judicial department, to say what the law is. Those who apply the rule to particular cases, must of necessity expound and interpret that rule.”

0 Comments:

Post a Comment

<< Home

Powered by Blogger

Google
WWW http://appellatepractice.blogspot.com