Case: National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers v. Newsom

S261827 | California state supreme court

Filed Date: 2020

Closed Date: May 4, 2020

Clearinghouse coding complete

Case Summary

COVID-19 Summary: This case was an emergency petition brought on behalf of criminal justice, juvenile justice, and criminal defense member organizations to challenge the conditions of incarceration in light of COVID-19 in California correctional facilities. The petitioners sought a release order to reduce the number of individuals incarcerated so facilities could better comply with public health guidelines. The court denied the petition without prejudice on May 4, 2020 and the case is now close…

COVID-19 Summary: This case was an emergency petition brought on behalf of criminal justice, juvenile justice, and criminal defense member organizations to challenge the conditions of incarceration in light of COVID-19 in California correctional facilities. The petitioners sought a release order to reduce the number of individuals incarcerated so facilities could better comply with public health guidelines. The court denied the petition without prejudice on May 4, 2020 and the case is now closed.


On April 24, 2020, the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers, California Attorneys for Criminal Justice, and the Youth Justice Coalition started this case by filing a petition in the California Supreme Court. The petitioners--member organizations composed of system-involved individuals and attorneys representing detained clients--sued California’s governor and attorney general under state law. The plaintiffs, represented by the ACLU and private counsel, sought emergency and declaratory relief, claiming violations of the Eighth Amendment, the Fourteenth Amendment due process clause, and the California state constitution. Specifically, the petitioners alleged that California had not sufficiently acted to protect the health of California residents in jails and juvenile facilities from COVID-19 and that correctional facilities lacked infrastructure for physical distancing and adequate hygiene. They sought an order to release detained individuals such that facilities could create conditions consistent with public health guidance to prevent the further spread of COVID-19.

On April 28, 2020 the state filed their preliminary opposition. The state contended that local officials in charge of their respective facilities had the duty to remedy any violations and that trial courts were better suited to resolve the factual issues raised in the petition. On April 30, the petitioners filed their reply.

On May 4, 2020 the California Supreme Court denied the petition without prejudice to future actions raising similar claims against these respondents in county superior courts. 2020 Cal. LEXIS 3096. In its reasoning, the court found that the petition sought remedies that involved a wide range of local conditions. According to the court, petitioners’ concerns invoked local responsibility for addressing facilities’ conditions. The order urged California superior courts to proceed rapidly to adequately respond to COVID-19. The case concluded.

Summary Authors

Lily Sawyer-Kaplan (6/14/2020)

People


Judge(s)

Cantil-Sakauye, Tani (California)

Attorney for Plaintiff

Agarwal, Shilpi (California)

Bibring, Peter (California)

Eliasberg, Peter J. (California)

Attorney for Defendant

Evans, Kelli M. (California)

show all people

Documents in the Clearinghouse

Document

S261827

Docket

May 4, 2020

May 4, 2020

Docket

S261827

Petition for Writ of Mandate

April 24, 2020

April 24, 2020

Complaint

S261827

Order

May 4, 2020

May 4, 2020

Order/Opinion

Resources

Docket

Last updated Aug. 30, 2023, 1:51 p.m.

Docket sheet not available via the Clearinghouse.

Case Details

State / Territory: California

Case Type(s):

Jail Conditions

Special Collection(s):

COVID-19 (novel coronavirus)

Key Dates

Filing Date: 2020

Closing Date: May 4, 2020

Case Ongoing: No

Plaintiffs

Plaintiff Description:

The National Association of Criminal Defense Attorneys is a membership organizations of criminal defense attorneys handling adult and juvenile cases; California Attorneys for Criminal Justice is a membership organization of criminal defense attorneys in California; and the Youth Justice Coalition is a membership organization focused on youth in the criminal justice system

Plaintiff Type(s):

Non-profit NON-religious organization

Attorney Organizations:

ACLU National (all projects)

ACLU of Southern California

ACLU Affiliates (any)

ACLU of Northern California

Public Interest Lawyer: Yes

Filed Pro Se: No

Class Action Sought: No

Class Action Outcome: Not sought

Defendants

Governor of California, State

California Attorney General, State

Defendant Type(s):

Jurisdiction-wide

Case Details

Causes of Action:

State law

Constitutional Clause(s):

Due Process

Due Process: Substantive Due Process

Cruel and Unusual Punishment

Special Case Type(s):

Appellate Court is initial court

Available Documents:

Complaint (any)

Non-settlement Outcome

Any published opinion

Outcome

Prevailing Party: Defendant

Nature of Relief:

None

Source of Relief:

None

Issues

General:

Bathing and hygiene

Conditions of confinement

Sanitation / living conditions

Jails, Prisons, Detention Centers, and Other Institutions:

Crowding / caseload

Medical/Mental Health:

Medical care, general

COVID-19:

Mitigation Denied

Mitigation Requested

Release Requested