California v. Johns
Annotate this CaseAppellant Gerry Johns claimed to be an offender previously convicted under the felony-murder rule or the natural and probable consequences doctrine eligible to have his murder conviction vacated if he couldn’t be convicted of murder under the new Penal Code sections 188 and 189. Johns petitioned to have his murder conviction vacated under the petitioning procedure established under Penal Code section 1170.95. The San Bernardino District Attorney’s Office opposed the petition and moved to strike it, arguing S.B. 1437 was invalid as an unauthorized amendment of two voter-approved ballot initiatives, Proposition 7 and Proposition 115. The trial court agreed, found S.B. 1437 unconstitutionally infringed on the prerogatives of the voters, and struck Johns’ petition. Johns appealed, seeking reversal and remand for the trial court to review his petition on the merits. The Court of Appeal agreed with Johns that S.B. 1437 was constitutional, and he was entitled to have the trial court consider his petition. Proposition 7 addressed the punishment appropriate for murder, not the elements of the offense, and Proposition 115 added predicates for applying the felony-murder rule, which S.B. 1437 left intact. The Court also concluded retroactive application of S.B. 1437 through the petitioning process did not violate the separation of powers doctrine or the Victims’ Bill of Rights of 2008 (Marsy’s Law), as the district attorney argued.
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.