Page 3
California Supreme Court:
Law Barring Trial of 14- and 15-Year-Olds As Adults Is Valid
Opinion Says Statute Does Not Contravene Voter-Approved Proposition 57
By a MetNews Staff Writer
The California Supreme Court held yesterday that a 2018 statute barring the trial of 14- and 15-year-olds as adults does not contravene Proposition 57, approved two years earlier by voters.
Justice Joshua P. Groban wrote the opinion for a unanimous court. The legislative enactment “amends” the proposition rather than contradicting it, he said.
His opinion reverses a Sept. 30, 2019 decision by Div. Six of this district’s Court of Appeal.
Proposition 57 barred prosecutors from charging minors as adults, requiring that delinquency petitions be filed in Juvenile Court, but providing that that a motion could be made to transfer the case, at the judge’s discretion, to a criminal court, where the minor was age 14 or older. The Legislature then enacted Senate Bill No. 1391, authored by then-Sen. Ricardo Lara, D-Bell Gardens (now state insurance commissioner), which provided that only cases where the alleged offender was age 16 or 17 could be removed.
Yegan’s View
Five courts of appeal declared SB 1391 constitutional; this district’s Div. Six held to the contrary in an opinion by Justice Kenneth Yegan, who wrote:
“The Legislature cannot overrule the electorate. All power of government ultimately resides in the people….Under the guise of ‘amendment,’ an initiative may not be ‘annulled’ by the Legislature. Consistent with precedent, we ‘jealously guard’ the law as declared by the voters. We hold that Senate Bill No. 1391 is unconstitutional insofar as it precludes the possibility of adult prosecution of an alleged 15-year-old murderer.”
He went on to say:
“Here, the superior court correctly ruled that the initiative authorizes the possibility of treating a 15-year-old alleged murderer as an adult and that S.B. 1391 precludes this possibility.
“S.B. 1391 is a jurisdictional change in substantive criminal law/juvenile law. It is not merely procedural. This attempt to ‘overrule’ Proposition 57 violates the well settled rule that the Legislature may not enact a law that thwarts the initiative process without the consent of the people.”
Gilbert’s Concurrence
Presiding Justice Arthur Gilbert signed Yegan’s opinion and said in a concurring opinion:
“However reasonable the views of my colleagues in other districts concerning the voter’s intent in Proposition 57, the words of Proposition 57 contradict that view. Our oath of office requires us to follow the clear language of the proposition absent a constitutional infirmity. Here the constitutional infirmity is in Senate Bill No. 1391.”
Ventura Superior Court Judge Kevin J. McGee had granted the motion of then-Ventura County District Attorney Gregory D. Totten to try accused murderer “O.G.,” age 15, in adult court, and O.G. sought a writ of mandate in the Court of Appeal commanding that the case remain in Juvenile Court. The court denied that petition, and O.G. sought, and was granted, Supreme Court review.
Then-Los Angeles County District Attorney Jackie Lacey filed an amicus brief calling for affirmance of the Court of Appeal’s decision; the current district attorney, George Gascón, who opposes trying juveniles as adults (see story on Page One), withdrew that brief.
Groban said in yesterday’s decision:
“In this case, the Court of Appeal held that Senate Bill 1391 is inconsistent with Proposition 57 and thus invalid…, a holding at odds with every other Court of Appeal opinion to have addressed the issue. We agree with the majority view that Senate Bill 1391 was a permissible amendment to Proposition 57 and we reverse the judgment in this case. Because Proposition 57 expressly permits legislative amendments, we must presume the Legislature acted within its authority and uphold Senate Bill 1391….While barring the transfer of 14 and 15 year olds to adult court is a change from Proposition 57’s statutory provisions, that change is what makes Senate Bill 1391 an amendment to Proposition 57. The amendment is fully consistent with and furthers Proposition 57’s fundamental purposes of promoting rehabilitation of youthful offenders and reducing the prison population.”
He went on to say:
“It does not matter if the District Attorney’s Office has a different view as to whether Senate Bill 1391 advances public safety or Proposition 57’s procedural scheme. The District Attorney’s Office seeks to turn the applicable standard on its head and argues that any doubts whether such a reasonable construction exists should be resolved in favor of precluding changes to the initiative. That is not the standard. We start with the presumption that the Legislature acted within its authority.”
Gascón Comments
Gascón said in a statement yesterday:
“I applaud today’s Supreme Court ruling. Children should not be treated as adults because they possess unique tendencies, such as impulsiveness, susceptibility to peer influence and inability to foresee the long-term consequences of their actions. “We know from science that young people have the capacity for growth and development that increases their likelihood of rehabilitation. Research shows that rehabilitation works and by rehabilitating our children, we will make it less likely that they will commit new crimes, thereby preventing victimization in the future and promoting healing in our communities.”
Criminal Justice Legal Foundation Associate Attorney Kymberlee Stapleton remarked:
“[B]y upholding SB 1391, the state will now be required to mandate that they release some of the most violent juvenile criminals in the country. The ruling has also opened the door to appeals from other juvenile murderers and sex offenders who received adult sentences, claiming that they are entitled to a new trial in juvenile court. The clear effect is that initiatives adopted by California voters will be subject to legislative amendment based upon a subjective view of ‘voter intent.’ ” O.G. is accused of two murders committed when he was 15. It is alleged that he fatally shot Jose Lopez, 22, on April 22, 2018, and stabbed to death Adrian “Mikey” Ornelas, 26, on May 20, 2018, the latter killing purportedly carried out to old’s gain respect from fellow gang members.
The case is O.G. v. Superior Court, 2021 S.O.S. 838.
Copyright 2021, Metropolitan News Company