In re Friend
- Area
- criminal
Analysis
No analysis yet. When one exists it is a model's reading of this opinion — the rulings it reviewed, whether it agrees with the court, and the authorities it checked — shown beside the court's own disposition, never in place of it. How analyses are made.
Opinion
Filed 9/1/21 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF CALIFORNIA In re JACK WAYNE FRIEND on Habeas Corpus.
S256914
First Appellate District, Division Three A155955 Alameda County Superior Court 81254A __________________________________________________________
ORDER MODIFYING OPINION
THE COURT: The majority opinion in this case, filed on June 28, 2021, and appearing at 11 Cal.5th 720, is modified as follows: On page 743, in the first sentence of the second full paragraph, the phrase “the statute” is replaced with “section 1509(d),” so that the sentence reads: Applying these principles, we conclude that when section 1509(d) is applied to a post-Proposition 66 petition subsequent to an initial pre-Proposition 66, post-Clark petition, section 1509(d) is not operating retroactively.
1 On page 743, in the third sentence of the second full paragraph, the phrase “This provision of” is added at the beginning of the sentence, so that the sentence begins: This provision of Proposition 66 underscores the importance of presenting available claims in the first petition . . . . This modification does not affect the judgment.
Cites, in this corpus
- In re Friend S256914 · 2021-06-28