Legal Opinion

In Re Tokhmanian

California Court of Appeal

Decided December 4, 2008No. B208427PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion

CROSKEY, Acting P. J.

A prisoner serving an indeterminate life term for murder was granted parole by a parole consideration panel (the panel). Concluding that a procedural error took place at the hearing before the panel, the Board of Parole Hearings (the board) disapproved the panel’s decision, and directed that a new parole hearing be scheduled. The prisoner sought relief from the board’s decision by means of a petition for habeas corpus. Concluding that the board’s decision was in error, the trial court vacated the board’s decision granting rehearing and reinstated the panel’s…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. In Re ArafilesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1992
  2. Helene Curtis, Inc. v. Los Angeles County Assessment Appeals BoardsCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2004

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. In Re PratherCalifornia Supreme Court · 2010
  2. In re LiraCalifornia Supreme Court · 2014
  3. In Re MasonerCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2009
  4. In Re PratherCalifornia Supreme Court · 2010
  5. Martinez v. MarshallDistrict Court, C.D. California · 2010

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

Powered by the Exa API