In re Cook
Annotate this CaseIn 2009, petitioner Anthony Cook, Jr. was convicted for two counts of murder and one count of attempted murder, for which he received a sentence of 125 years to life. Petitioner was 17 years old at the time of the crimes, and through petition for habeas relief, contended his sentence was unconstitutional under "Miller v. Alabama," (132 S.Ct. 2455 (2012)). In "In re Cook (Apr. 6, 2016, G050907) (nonpub. opn.), the Court of Appeal denied Petitioner's petition for writ of habeas corpus, concluding that based on "Montgomery v. Louisiana," (136 S.Ct. 718 (2016)), "Miller" applied retroactively to cases on collateral review but that recently enacted Penal Code sections 3051 and 4801 had the effect of curing the unconstitutional sentence imposed on Petitioner. In July 2016, the California Supreme Court granted Petitioner's petition for review of the Court of Appeals' opinion and transferred the matter with directions to vacate the decision and consider, in light of "California v. Franklin," (63 Cal.4th 261 (2016), "whether petitioner is entitled to make a record before the superior court of 'mitigating evidence tied to his youth.'" The Court of Appeals granted the petition insofar as the relief sought in the prayer of Petitioner's supplemental opening brief sought a hearing to allow Petitioner to make a record of mitigating evidence tied to his youth at the time of the offense. The matter was remanded with directions to the trial court to grant Petitioner a hearing at which he can make a record of such mitigating evidence. In doing so, the Court held that the relief afforded by "Franklin" was available by both direct review and petition for writ of habeas corpus.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.