Criminal Justice Legal Foundation

“There were 15 voting members of the board during the year.”

“Director reviews 990 prior to filing”

“This organization has few outside contractors therefore, they are able to review all new contracts as they may enter into it, to be assured it is not with an entity that any of their Board or employees have an interest in.”

“At least annually, the Board reviews salaries and benefits paid to all employees (including officers and key employees), and votes on bonuses or salary increases accordingly.”

“At least annually, the Board reviews salaries and benefits paid to all employees (including officers and key employees), and votes on bonuses or salary increases accordingly.”

“Governing documents, policies and financial statements may be viewed upon request at the Foundation's office located at 2131 L Street, Sacramento, California.”

“Client Note 1 - Public interest law firm: Attachment of legal cases participated in during the year. Rulings favoring the Foundations positions are listed as WINS and unfavorable rulings are LOSSES. Rulings which have left the issue unsettled are DRAWS:Hall v. Florida: 5/27/14. WIN U. S. Supreme Court decision announcing that, when determining the IQ of a murder defendant who claims he is ineligible for the death penalty because he is mentally retarded, states should not use a rigid cutoff score that does not account for a margin of error. The case involved a murderer's claim that the IQ requirement for mental retardation should be expanded from a score of below 70 to a range of 67 to 75. In 1981, Freddie Lee Hall, and an accomplice, kidnapped a 21-year-old pregnant woman from a grocery store parking lot and drove her into the woods where she was raped, beaten, and shot to death. After two decades of appeals upholding Halls conviction and sentence, the Supreme Court decided in another case that executing the mentally retarded was unconstitutional. At that time, the Florida Legislature had already adopted a nationally accepted standard, which included an IQ below 70 to qualify. Hall, whose lowest IQ score was 71, asked the Supreme Court to broaden the range to include him. When the Supreme Court agreed to hear Halls appeal, CJLF accepted the Florida Attorney Generals request to join the case. CJLF argued that standards for mental retardation should be left up to the states. Otherwise, well-deserved sentences for clearly guilty murderers will be held up for years as these issues are endlessly reviewed.People v. Moffett: 5/5/14. DRAW California Supreme Court ruling that a California law, which allows murderers between the ages of 16 and 18 years old to be eligible for a sentence of life without the possibility of parole (LWOP), does not violate the U. S. Supreme Courts June 2012 decision in Miller v. Alabama. The case involves a criminal (a few days short of his 18th birthday) who committed an armed robbery along with an accomplice. During their attempted escape, the accomplice shot and killed a police officer. Andrew Moffett was convicted of the murder of Officer Larry Lasater, which is a death penalty offense for murderers over 18. Because of his age, he received a sentence of LWOP. During sentencing, the judge noted that she was exercising her discretion to give this sentence, rather than life with parole, due to the circumstances of the crime. While Moffetts case was on appeal, the U. S. Supreme Court, in Miller v. Alabama, abolished mandatory LWOP for murderers under 18. The state Court of Appeals overturned Moffetts sentence announcing that it violated the spirit of Miller. When the California Supreme Court agreed to hear the states appeal, CJLF filed an amicus curiae brief on behalf of Officer Lasaters wife, mother, and brother arguing to reinstate Moffetts sentence. The brief noted that the Miller ruling bars mandatory LWOP for murderers under the age of 18, while California law gives judges sentencing discretion. The state Supreme Court agreed, but due to Millers expanded factors that must be considered at sentencing, Moffetts case was sent back to the original trial judge for re-sentencing.White v. Woodall: 4/23/14. WIN A 6-3 U. S. Supreme Court decision to reverse a 2012 federal appeals court ruling which had improperly held the murderer's death sentence unconstitutional. Undisputed evidence, including a DNA match, proved that on the evening of January 25, 1997, Woodall kidnapped high school cheerleader Sarah Hansen from a convenience store and took her to a nearby lake where he raped and beat her before slitting her throat. After Woodall pled guilty to the crimes, the sentencing jury heard testimony from 14 witnesses supporting a life sentence, but Woodall did not take the stand. Following his conviction and sentence, Woodall won a federal court ruling overturning his death sentence, announcing that the judge had viol”