California v. TireyAnnotate this Case
In 2013, the California Court of Appeal determined that defendant John Tirey was eligible to apply for a certificate of rehabilitation pursuant to Penal Code section 4852.01. After a rehearing, a majority reached the same conclusion. The California Supreme Court granted the Attorney General’s petition for review, and has since transferred the case back to the Court of Appeal to reconsider its decision following "Johnson v. Department of Justice," (60 Cal.4th 871(2015))." In both Tirey I and Tirey II, the appellate court urged the Legislature to give attention to the statutes at issue. A bill was proposed following the issuance of Tirey I, and legislation amending the statutes was enacted after the issuance of Tirey II. Under the language of the relevant statutes as they now read, neither defendant nor a person convicted of committing a similar or more heinous sex crime against a minor would be eligible to apply for a certificate of rehabilitation; as a consequence, no constitutional issues are implicated. The Supreme Court held in "Western Security Bank v. Superior Court," (15 Cal.4th 232 (1997)) that when an appellate court issues an opinion, and the Legislature considers that opinion in clarifying the challenged law, courts are bound to apply the clarified law in the pending case. Doing so here, the Court of Appeal held that defendant was not eligible to apply for a certificate of rehabilitation, and affirmed the trial court’s order.