Legal Opinion
In re Young
California Court of Appeal
Decided March 14, 2012No. A131729PublishedCited by 7 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
LAMBDEN, J.
—Petitioner Andrew Young seeks a writ of habeas corpus arising from his denial of parole by the Board of Parole Hearings (Board). The Board’s decision was principally based on its conclusion that petitioner lacked insight into what the Board considered to be a particularly egregious crime and why he committed it.
The Board’s decision must be vacated because it does not meet what our Supreme Court has repeatedly stated are two basic imperatives of due *293process. As the court most recently discussed in In re Shaputis (2011) 53 Cal.4th 192 [134 Cal.Rptr.3d 86, 265 P.3d 253]…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Swarthout v. CookeSupreme Court of the United States · 2011
- Hayward v. MarshallCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2010
- In Re RosenkrantzCalifornia Supreme Court · 2002
- In re LawrenceCalifornia Supreme Court · 2008
- In Re DannenbergCalifornia Supreme Court · 2005
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- In re MorgantiCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2012
- In re ButlerCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2014
- In re Butler CA1/2California Court of Appeal · 2015
- In re Fowler CA3California Court of Appeal · 2013
- In re MartinezCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2015
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.