Legal Opinion · Dissent

People v. Suarez

California Court of Appeal, 5th District

Decided December 4, 2017No. F070210Published

1Dissent

Smith, J., Concurring and Dissenting

I concur with the majority in sections I. through VII. and IX., which comprise the unpublished portion of this opinion. I respectfully dissent from the majority's decision that Proposition 57 applies prospectively only and does not extend to cases such as Suarez's, which were pending final *461judgment on its effective date. Although there is a general presumption that new laws apply prospectively, Tapia v. Superior Court (1991) 53 Cal.3d 282, 287, 279 Cal.Rptr. 592, 807 P.2d 434, I conclude that Proposition 57 is subject to the exception to that presumption…

2Cases cited17 opinions

  1. Miller v. AlabamaSupreme Court of the United States · 2012
  2. People v. WatsonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1956
  3. Graham v. FloridaSupreme Court of the United States · 2010
  4. In Re EstradaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1965
  5. People v. BrownCalifornia Supreme Court · 2012

12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API