An individual convicted of murder with malice aforethought and carjacking waived his Fifth Amendment protection against self-incrimination to testify on his own behalf during a hearing on his petition for a writ of habeas corpus in Alameda County Superior Court.
The U.S. Supreme Court, in decisions on Rutherford v. United States and Fernandez v. United States, restricted the application of compassionate release, a move critics contend undermines bipartisan federal sentencing reforms. The Court ruled that early prison release cannot be employed to re-evaluate cases based on questions of past conviction validity or excessive penalties, thereby establishing new limitations on future proceedings for early release.
The U.S. Department of Justice has proposed new regulations that would permit the Attorney General to accelerate federal death penalty appeals by certifying states based on their assurances of competent legal representation, a move that has drawn criticism from public defenders and advocacy organizations warning of an increased risk of wrongful executions.
The Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that a former Orange County Superior Court judge’s racist and sexist jokes during a capital murder trial were “inexcusable,” but did not rise to the level of a constitutional violation requiring reversal of the death sentence.
The Supreme Court case of Pitchford v. Cain raises concerns about the ability of federal courts to meaningfully review claims of racial discrimination in criminal trials, as the case highlights the procedural barriers of modern post-conviction review and the difficulty of applying the Batson principle in practice.
A federal habeas corpus petition has been filed in the case of Cameron Isaac, arguing that flawed forensic testimony and a coerced witness statement led to his 2017 murder conviction, and that new evidence now calls the verdict into question.
The number of habeas corpus petitions filed by ICE detainees nationwide is declining as the Trump administration rolls back its hardline immigration enforcement policies, though regional spikes highlight the ongoing legal battle.
A federal judge in West Virginia released an immigrant from custody after government lawyers falsely claimed he had a criminal history, highlighting the mistakes being made by Department of Justice lawyers and Homeland Security officials in the surge of court orders following Trump’s immigration reforms.
A California Court of Appeal granted relief to a petitioner after ruling that the trial court applied the wrong legal standard in denying his request for appointed counsel under the California Racial Justice Act.
The U.S. Supreme Court will hear arguments on March 31 in the long-running Mississippi case of Pitchford v. Cain to determine whether the accused was improperly denied the right to challenge alleged racial discrimination in jury selection.
The Supreme Court’s decision in Bowe v. United States opens a path for federal prisoners to challenge unlawful convictions and sentences, as lower courts had previously closed, by allowing them to seek Supreme Court review when permission to file post-conviction motions is denied.
The Florida Supreme Court affirmed the denial of postconviction relief and rejected a habeas corpus petition filed by James Terry Colley Jr., a death row inmate, ruling that his claims of ineffective assistance of counsel and fundamental error failed to justify relief.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit has affirmed the denial of federal habeas relief for Juan Carlos Alvarez, a Texas death row man, who argued that ineffective legal representation and unreliable forensic evidence violated his constitutional rights during his capital murder trial.
Judge Tom Dyer postponed a habeas corpus case in Yolo County Superior Court due to a lack of discovery and difficulty communicating with the accused, rescheduling it for December 5, 2025.
Douglas “Chief” Stankewitz, California’s longest-serving individual on death row, is seeking relief under the California Racial Justice Act, arguing that racial bias tainted his conviction and sentence in a case that has kept him incarcerated since 1978.
Justice Clarence Thomas’s dissent in the Supreme Court case Gutierrez v. Saenz argued that the Constitution does not require states to offer any postconviction relief, effectively closing the courthouse doors once a conviction is handed down.
(NOTE: Kensu claims innocence despite a murder conviction almost forty years ago. Wrestling with the legal system…
WASHINGTON, D.C. – The Due Process Institute and four other civil rights institutions filed an amicus brief…
By Kristin Trent WOODLAND, CA – Here in Yolo County Superior Court Friday, Ajay Dev’s previous attorney…
By Kaylee Pearlman LOS ANGELES, CA – The California Supreme Court this week ruled the state had…