Stanford Law School - Robert Crown Law Library

Filed 8/19/09

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF CALIFORNIA

THE PEOPLE,
Plaintiff and Respondent,
S154847
v.
Ct.App. 6 H028798
VINCE VINHTUONG NGUYEN,
Santa Clara County
Defendant and Appellant.
Super. Ct. No. CC476520
___________________________________ )

ORDER MODIFYING OPINION
THE COURT:
On the court’s own motion, the opinion herein, filed on July 2, 2009, appearing at 46
Cal.4th 1007, is modified as follows:
The second sentence of the final paragraph on page 1020 is modified to read:
Except for the decision here under review, all California Court of Appeal panels to
address the issue in a published opinion, both before and after Apprendi, have squarely
held that the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments permit the use of prior juvenile
adjudications to enhance the sentences for subsequent adult offenses, even though there is
no right to a jury trial in juvenile proceedings.
This modification does not affect the judgment.

---

Petition for review after the Court of Appeal reversed a judgment of conviction of criminal offenses. This case presents the following issue: Can a prior juvenile adjudication of a criminal offense in California constitutionally subject a defendant to the provisions of the three strikes law (Pen. Code, ?? 667, subds. (b)-(i), 1170.12) although there is no right to a jury trial in juvenile wardship proceedings in this state?

Opinion Information

Date:	Citation:	Docket Number:	Category:	Status:
Wed, 08/19/2009	46 Cal. 4th 1007, 209 P.3d 946, 95 Cal. Rptr. 3d 615	S154847M	Review - Criminal Appeal	closed; remittitur issued

Opinion Authors
Opinion	Justice Marvin R. Baxter
Dissent	Justice Joyce L. Kennard

Disposition
Jul 2 2009	Opinion: Reversed

Dockets
Jul 30 2007	Received premature petition for review The People, respondent by Eric D. Share, Deputy Attorney General
Jul 31 2007	Case start: Petition for review filed The People, Respondent by Eric D. Share, Deputy Attorney General
Jul 31 2007	Record requested
Aug 2 2007	Received Court of Appeal record one file folder/briefs/transcript
Sep 21 2007	Time extended to grant or deny review The time for granting or denying review in the above-entitled matter is hereby extended to and including October 29, 2007, or the date upon which review is either granted or denied.
Oct 10 2007	Petition for review granted (criminal case) Votes: George, C.J., Kennard, Baxter, Werdegar, Chin, Moreno and Corrigan, JJ.
Oct 29 2007	Request for extension of time filed The People requesting to December 10, 2007, to file opening brief on the merits (to court for permission)
Oct 31 2007	Extension of time granted On application of respondent and good cause appearing, it is ordered that the time to serve and file the opening brief on the merits is extended to and including December 10, 2007.
Dec 4 2007	Application for relief from default filed Eric D. Share, Deputy Attorney General, counsel for respondent requesting relief to file the opening brief on the merits in excess of 14,000 words (to court for permission)
Dec 5 2007	Opening brief on the merits filed The People, Plaintiff and Respondent Eric D. Share, counsel (filed w/permission)
Dec 14 2007	Request for extension of time filed Michelle M. Thomson counsel for appellant requesting 60-day extension of time to March 4, 2008, to file answer brief on the merits (to court for permission to file)
Dec 31 2007	Extension of time granted On application of appellant and good cause appearing, it is ordered that the time to serve and file the answer brief on the merits is extended to and including February 4, 2008.
Jan 23 2008	Request for extension of time filed Michelle M. Thomson counsel for appellant requesting 30-day extension of time to March 5, 2008, to file answer brief on the merits (to court for permission to file)
Jan 31 2008	Extension of time granted On application of appellant and good cause appearing, it is ordered that the time to serve and file the answer brief on the merits is extended to and including March 5, 2008. No further extensions of time are contemplated.
Mar 4 2008	Answer brief on the merits filed Vince Vinthuong Nguyen, Defendant and Appellant. Michelle M. Thomson & Douglas L. Rappaport, counsel
Mar 13 2008	Request for extension of time filed Eric D. Share, Deputy Attorney General, for The People requesting to April 7 to file reply brief on the merits. (to court for permission to file)
Mar 18 2008	Extension of time granted On application of respondent and good cause appearing, it is ordered that the time to serve and file the reply brief on the merits is extended to and including April 7, 2008. No further extensions of time are contemplated.
Mar 27 2008	Reply brief filed (case fully briefed) The People, Plaintiff and Respondent Eric D. Share, Deputy Attorney General
Apr 7 2008	Received application to file Amicus Curiae Brief and application to file oversized brief. California Public Defenders Association in support of Appellant. by Seth Flagsberg, counsel
Apr 16 2008	Permission to file amicus curiae brief granted The application of California Public Defenders Association for permission to file an oversized amicus curiae brief in support of appellant is hereby granted. An answer thereto may be served and filed by any party within twenty days of the filing of the brief.
Apr 16 2008	Amicus curiae brief filed California Public Defenders Association, Seth Flagsberg, Deputy Public Defender and Michael Ogul, Chief Deputy Public Defender
Apr 25 2008	Received application to file Amicus Curiae Brief Los Angeles County District Attorney [in support of resp] ~Deputy District Attorneys Lael Rubin, Phyllis Asayama and Roberta Schwartz
Apr 28 2008	Received application to file Amicus Curiae Brief Galit Lipa counsel for amici Criminal Defense Clinic, Mills Legal Clinic of Stanford Law School in support of respondent. (to court for permission to file)
Apr 30 2008	Received application to file Amicus Curiae Brief from Jessica Feierman counsel for amici Pacific Juvenile Defender Center et al. in support of appellant (CRC, rule 8.25(b) - UPS Next Day Air) (to court for permission to file)
Apr 30 2008	Permission to file amicus curiae brief granted The application of Criminal Defense Clinic, Mills Legal Clinic of Stanford Law School for permission to file an amicus curiae brief in support of respondent is hereby granted. An answer thereto may be served and filed by any party within twenty days of the filing of the brief.
Apr 30 2008	Amicus curiae brief filed Criminal Defense Clinic, Mills Legal Clinic of Stanford Law School in support of respondent. Galit Lipa, counsel
Apr 30 2008	Permission to file amicus curiae brief granted The application of Los Angeles County District Attorney for permission to file an amicus curiae brief in support of respondent is hereby granted. An answer thereto may be served and filed by any party within twenty days of the filing of the brief.
Apr 30 2008	Amicus curiae brief filed Los Angeles County District Attorney in support of respondent. Roberta Schwartz, Deputy District Attorney
May 6 2008	Permission to file amicus curiae brief granted The application of Pacific Juvenile Defender Center, Juvenile Law Center, Juvenile Division of the Los Angeles Public Defender, Alternate Pubic Defender, National Center for Youth Law and Youth Law Center for permission to file an amicus curiae brief in support of appellant is hereby granted. An answer thereto may be served and filed by any party within twenty days of the filing of the brief.
May 6 2008	Amicus curiae brief filed Pacific Juvenile Defender Center, Juvenile Law Center, Juvenile Division of the Los Angeles Public Defender, Alternate Pubic Defender, National Center for Youth Law and Youth Law Center in in support of appellant. Jessica Feierman, Jonathan Laba and Maureen Pacheco, counsel
Jul 10 2008	Received: letter from Maureen Pacheco counsel for Amici Curiae Pacific Juvenile Defender Center with a copy of a recently decided case.
Mar 11 2009	Case ordered on calendar to be argued Monday, April 6, 2009, at 1:30 p.m., in Los Angeles
Mar 16 2009	Filed: Letter from Douglas L. Rappaport, counsel for appellant Nguyen, asking to delay argument until the last week of May.
Mar 16 2009	Order filed Appellant's request to reschedule oral argument from April 2009 to a later date, filed March 13, 2009, is denied.
Mar 23 2009	Supplemental brief filed by the respondent, citing case: Apprendi v. New Jersey (2000) 530 U.S. 466. by Eric D. Share, deputy attorney general
Apr 6 2009	Cause argued and submitted
Apr 8 2009	Received: additional authorities regarding "History of the Juvenile Trial Right", from counsel for the appellant.
Jul 1 2009	Notice of forthcoming opinion posted
Jul 2 2009	Opinion filed: Judgment reversed Majority Opinion by: Baxter, J. -----joined by: George, C.J., Werdegar, Chin, Moreno, and Corrigan, JJ. Dissenting Opinion by: Kennard, J.
Jul 17 2009	Rehearing petition filed Vince Vinthuong Nguyen, Defendant and Appellant. Douglas L. Rappaport and Michelle M. Thomson, counsel.
Jul 20 2009	Time extended to consider modification or rehearing The time for granting or denying rehearing in the above-entitled case is hereby extended to and including September 30, 2009, or the date upon which rehearing is either granted or denied, whichever occurs first.
Aug 19 2009	Rehearing denied; opinion modified Kennard, J., is of the opinion the petition should be granted.
Aug 19 2009	Opinion modified - no change in judgment
Aug 19 2009	Remittitur issued
Aug 24 2009	Received: Receipt for remittitur

Briefs
Dec 5 2007	Opening brief on the merits filed The People, Plaintiff and Respondent Eric D. Share, counsel (filed w/permission)
Mar 4 2008	Answer brief on the merits filed Vince Vinthuong Nguyen, Defendant and Appellant. Michelle M. Thomson & Douglas L. Rappaport, counsel
Mar 27 2008	Reply brief filed (case fully briefed) The People, Plaintiff and Respondent Eric D. Share, Deputy Attorney General
Apr 16 2008	Amicus curiae brief filed California Public Defenders Association, Seth Flagsberg, Deputy Public Defender and Michael Ogul, Chief Deputy Public Defender
Apr 30 2008	Amicus curiae brief filed Criminal Defense Clinic, Mills Legal Clinic of Stanford Law School in support of respondent. Galit Lipa, counsel
Apr 30 2008	Amicus curiae brief filed Los Angeles County District Attorney in support of respondent. Roberta Schwartz, Deputy District Attorney
May 6 2008	Amicus curiae brief filed Pacific Juvenile Defender Center, Juvenile Law Center, Juvenile Division of the Los Angeles Public Defender, Alternate Pubic Defender, National Center for Youth Law and Youth Law Center in in support of appellant. Jessica Feierman, Jonathan Laba and Maureen Pacheco, counsel

Brief Downloads
OpeningBrief for AG.pdf (15907711 bytes) - Opening Brief on the Merits by CA Attorney General's Office
Answer Brief for Nguyen.pdf (199561 bytes) - Answer Brief on the Merits for Nguyen
ReplyBrief by AG.pdf (3719218 bytes) - Reply Brief on the Merits by CA Attorney General's Office
Nguyen-amicus Juvie Centers.pdf (1335398 bytes) - Amicus Brief on behalf of Pacific Juvenile Defender Center and others
Nguyen Amicus Mills Legal Clinic.pdf (78093 bytes) - Amicus Brief on behalf of Mills Legal Clinic, Stanford Law School
Nguyen Amicus Br Cal Pub Defenders.pdf (181502 bytes) - Amicus Brief on behalf of California Public Defenders Association

If you'd like to submit a brief document to be included for this opinion, please submit an e-mail to the SCOCAL website