The Supreme Court this morning posted a revised March calendar. Continuing one case and adding two new cases (with the minimum amount of notice), there will now be five arguments next month instead of four.
The day after first announcing the calendar, the court received a letter from the Deputy Attorney General on one of the cases — People v. Becerra, an automatic death penalty appeal — that she would be unavailable in March and April. The letter was dated a week earlier, so perhaps counsel didn’t actually violate the good-practice principle of advising the court of unavailability before the case is put on calendar. In any event, the court is accommodating counsel’s schedule — as the court often, but not always, does — and is continuing the Becerra argument. Accommodating, that is, up to a point — the argument has been continued until April, even though counsel’s letter said she was unavailable that month, too.
Substituting for Becerra on the March calendar are (with the issue presented as stated on the court’s website):
Winn v. Pioneer Medical Group, Inc.: Does “neglect” within the meaning of the Elder Abuse and Dependent Adult Civil Protection Act (Welf. & Inst. Code, § 15657) include a health care provider’s failure to refer an elder patient to a specialist if the care took place on an outpatient basis, or must an action for neglect under the Act allege that the defendant health care provider had a custodial relationship with the elder patient?
People v. Robinson: Is misdemeanor sexual battery (Pen. Code, § 243.4, subd. (e)(1)) a lesser included offense of sexual battery by fraudulent representation (Pen. Code, § 243.4, subd. (c))?
