The Supreme Court’s five-case February calendar, announced today, will be the largest so far this term. Four of the five cases are criminal matters.
Because of Justice Martin Jenkins’s October retirement, there will be a Court of Appeal justice sitting pro tem in each case. The pro tems will be named later.
On Wednesday, February 4, in Sacramento, the court will hear these cases (with the issue or issues presented as summarized by court staff or limited by the court itself):
In re Z.G. and In re A.G: The court limited the issue in Z.G. to — “Can parental rights properly be terminated pursuant to Welfare and Institutions Code section 366.26, subdivision (c)(1) when a parent did not receive reunification services and was not bypassed for such services?” In A.G., court staff said, “This case presents issues relating to claims of ineffective assistance of counsel in connection with juvenile dependency proceedings resulting in the termination of petitioner’s parental rights.” The court granted review in May 2025. More about the cases here.
In re Kowalczyk: The court limited the issues to — “(1) Which constitutional provision governs the denial of bail in noncapital cases – article I, section 12, subdivisions (b) and (c), or article I, section 28, subdivision (f)(3), of the California Constitution – or, in the alternative, can these provisions be reconciled? (2) May a superior court ever set pretrial bail above an arrestee’s ability to pay?” This is one of the oldest non-capital cases on the court’s docket. Review was granted in March 2023. More about the case here.
People v. Morris: Court staff said the issue is, “Did the trial court correctly deny defendant’s Penal Code section 1172.6 resentencing petition at the prima facie stage on the ground that the actus reus of first degree felony murder requires that a defendant who is not the actual killer need only aid in the underlying felony and not in the killing itself (Pen. Code, § 189, subd. (e)(2))?” The court granted review in July 2024. More about the case here.
People v. Lopez: When the court granted review in January 2025, it limited the issue to — “Does Penal Code section 1172.6, subdivision (a)(3), which requires defendants to allege that they ‘could not presently be convicted of murder or attempted murder because of changes to section 188 or 189 made effective January 1, 2019,’ render ineligible for relief petitioners who could have raised their challenges to imputed malice on prior direct appeal?” More about the case here.
People v. Stayner: This is an automatic direct appeal from a December 2002 judgment of death. Unlike in discretionary review cases, the court’s website does not list issues for death penalty appeals. Counsel was appointed in June 2009. Initial briefing was completed in June 2019. Supplemental briefing was completed last month.
Briefs for the cases will soon be posted here. The arguments will be live streamed. Opinions in the cases should file by May 4.
