Actions of note at yesterday’s Supreme Court conference — a double one — included:
- Supreme Court signs off on two more commutations.
- Supreme Court will answer Ninth Circuit’s insurance law question.
- The court denied review in Wilmot v. Contra Costa County Employees’ Retirement Association, another case challenging a part of the Public Employees’ Pension Reform Act of 2013. The plaintiff may or may not have been retired when the Act took effect. Either way, the First District, Division Two, Court of Appeal held in a published opinion, a provision in the Act was constitutionally applied to require forfeiture of the plaintiff’s retirement benefits because of a felony conviction. The opinion follows a remand for reconsideration in light of the Supreme Court’s opinion last year in Alameda County Deputy Sheriff’s Association v. Alameda County Employees’ Retirement Association (2020) 9 Cal.5th 1032. The denial of review is a further indication that the court is not anxious to write another opinion about pension reform. (More: here, here, and here.)
- The court granted and transferred in Wright v. Superior Court, after the First District, Division Three, summarily denied a writ petition. The Supreme Court also vacated “the superior court’s order authorizing involuntary medication,” at least until the Court of Appeal rules otherwise.
- There were 33 criminal case grant-and-holds: eight more holding for a decision in People v. Lewis (see here), which will be argued next week; two more holding for People v. Lopez (see here); one more holding for Lewis and Lopez (that’s a total of 266 Lewis grant-and-holds); 16 more holding for People v. Delgadillo (see here); one more holding for People v. Renteria (see here and here); three more holding for People v. Raybon (see here), which, like Lewis, will be argued next week; one more holding for People v. Tirado (see here); and one more holding for People v. Hernandez (see here).
- The court got rid of a dozen grant-and-holds that had been waiting for its February decision in O.G. v. Superior Court (2021) 11 Cal.5th 82, which held to be constitutional a statute eliminating the possibility of transfer to adult court of almost all prosecutions for crimes committed by 14- and 15-year-olds. Review was dismissed in 11 of the grant-and-holds; one was remanded for reconsideration in light of O.G.
