Murder of Jimmy Farris

Last updated

On May 22, 1995, 16-year-old Jimmy Farris, the son of a Los Angeles Police Department officer, was stabbed to death. Farris and his friend, Michael McLoren, were next to a clubhouse-type fort in McLoren's backyard. Four acquaintances of Farris and McLoren (Micah Holland, Jason Holland, Tony Miliotti, and Brandon Hein) jumped the chainlink fence and approached the fort. There was a fight inside the fort. Farris and McLoren went into the house, bleeding from stab wounds, while the other four climbed back over the fence and left. Farris died before paramedics arrived. McLoren was airlifted to UCLA Medical Center.

Contents

The Holland brothers, Miliotti, and Hein were charged with felony murder, among other charges. A fifth male, Christopher Velardo, who remained outside the yard in the truck throughout the incident, was charged with voluntary manslaughter and conspiracy to commit robbery. Velardo pled guilty to the charges, receiving a sentence of 11 years. The other four were found guilty and received lengthy sentences.

The case received widespread media attention. Public opinion was divided on the application of the felony murder rule in this case and the lengthy sentences given to the defendants.

Description of the fight

The following description of the fight and stabbing is from the "Summary of Facts and Proceedings" in the January 29, 2001 California Court of Appeal findings. [1] Note that the term "appellants" excludes Christopher Velardo, 17, owner of the pickup truck, who remained in the truck throughout the incident and was tried separately.

At approximately 7:00 p.m. McLoren and Farris were in the McLoren backyard in the immediate vicinity of the fort. Without permission or invitation, all appellants as a group entered the McLoren backyard by hopping over a fence. Micah Holland (Micah) and Miliotti entered first. Jason and Hein followed approximately ten to fifteen feet behind Micah and Miliotti. Micah immediately entered the fort and Miliotti stood in the doorway. Appellants did not have permission or invitation to enter the fort. There had not been prior arrangement for the sale of marijuana between McLoren and appellants.

Appellant Jason was carrying a folding pocketknife. There is no evidence that appellants Micah, Hein, or Miliotti carried weapons or that any of them knew Jason carried a pocketknife.

Appellant Micah unsuccessfully attempted to pull open the locked desk drawer. Next, appellants Micah and Hein, in a threatening manner, shouted words demanding that McLoren turn over the key to the locked desk drawer. Appellant Micah, when threatening McLoren and demanding the key, shouted, “Give me the key fool” and “Give me the key, ese. You want shit with Gumbys, ese?” McLoren refused to relinquish the key.

Appellants Micah, Jason and Hein then verbally and physically assaulted McLoren. The intensity and violence of the battle escalated. McLoren held Micah face down on a bed and elbowed him about the back and neck. Jason attempted to pull McLoren off of Micah. McLoren kicked Jason in the face. McLoren then heard appellant Jason say, “Let's get this fucker.” While being held in a headlock, McLoren twice felt sharp, debilitating, pulsating sensations, which later proved to be multiple stab wounds. Jason admitted stabbing McLoren.

After McLoren was stabbed, Farris entered the fort and became involved in the melee. Farris confronted Jason, who turned and, without hesitation, stabbed Farris twice in the torso. Immediately thereafter, McLoren observed Hein beating Farris in the head and face with his fists. Farris did not resist or otherwise defend himself from the blows administered by Hein.

Both McLoren and Farris broke away from the fight and ran to McLoren's house. They each reported to McLoren's mother that “. . . they (appellants) came to get our stuff . . .” and had stabbed them. Mrs. McLoren saw a stab wound in the center of Farris’ chest.

Witnesses observed appellants together leaving the McLoren yard, being met by the Velardo pickup truck and driving away in Velardo's pickup truck. A witness testified that he observed the four appellants on the street as they left the McLoren backyard apparently talking among themselves and smiling.

Charges

Christopher Velardo, 17, who remained outside in the truck throughout the incident, was charged and tried separately.

Micah Holland, 15, Brandon Hein, 18, and Anthony Miliotti, 17, as well as the actual killer Jason Holland, 18, were charged with burglary, attempted robbery, and murder committed during the course of a burglary and an attempted robbery, and with attempted willful, deliberate, premeditated murder of McLoren. [1]

All four were charged with felony murder because the murder was committed during the course of a felony, the alleged attempted robbery of McLoren's marijuana.

California law allows felony murder charges to be "enhanced" by special circumstances if the murder is committed during the commission of certain other crimes, among them robbery and burglary. The special circumstances of robbery and burglary were both alleged in this case. Murders under special circumstances require the imposition of the death penalty or life without possibility of parole. [2]

Trial

The severity of the charges polarized the small town of Agoura Hills and attracted international attention. The case was heard in the Superior Court of Los Angeles County in Malibu, California, with Judge Lawrence Mira presiding.

The issue of the defendants' intent when entering the McLoren property and during the events at the fort was critical and hotly contested throughout the trial. The defendants said they had gone to the fort to buy, not steal, marijuana that day, so there was no burglary or attempted robbery. McLoren, testifying as a prosecution witness under promise of immunity from prosecution on drug charges, said there had been no prior arrangement for the sale of marijuana.

Testimony about the earlier wallet theft was introduced, with Judge Mira instructing the jury that it could be considered only to determine if it tended to show the criminal intent required for the offenses charged later that day. The prosecution said that both incidents were alike, in that they were theft-type offenses involving group action and intimidating conduct by members of the group. [1]

Extensive media coverage before the trial had suggested that the defendants were members of Gumbys, a local street gang. In pre-trial proceedings, Judge Mira found that there was insufficient evidence that the defendants were gang members and excluded any evidence of gang membership. Notwithstanding this ruling, during cross-examination the prosecution twice asked Jason Holland about Gumbys, including asking him if he was a member. Judge Mira instructed the jury to ignore these questions. During closing arguments, the prosecution again strongly suggested the existence of gang activity. These suggestions of gang activity were brought up in the defendants' later appeal as prejudicial misconduct that deprived them of their right to a fair trial. [1]

Jason Holland admitted stabbing both McLoren and Farris.

On May 28, 1996, the jury found the four defendants guilty of burglary, attempted robbery, and murder committed during the course of a burglary and an attempted robbery, that is, felony murder. In addition, Jason Holland was convicted of assault with a deadly weapon. The jury also found the allegations of special circumstances to be true, and found the murder, burglary and attempted robbery to be of the first degree. [1]

Sentences

The four were sentenced to state prison as follows: [1]

Christopher Velardo pleaded guilty separately to voluntary manslaughter and conspiracy to commit robbery and was sentenced to eleven years. [3] Velardo was released from prison in 2000. [4]

In October 2019, Hein was granted parole. He is expected to be released from prison by summer 2020. [5]

Supporters

The case attracted international attention and support, due largely to media coverage of the charges, the application of the felony murder rule, and the long sentences imposed.

Director William Gazecki made a documentary film called Reckless Indifference about the murder, trial, and resulting prison sentences. In his film, Gazecki argues that the defendants received an unfair trial and overly harsh sentences.

A bill by former California state senator Tom Hayden to revise California's felony murder rule died in the Senate.

Actor Charles Grodin wrote and directed a sympathetic play, The Prosecution of Brandon Hein.

In 2005 Gazecki was a guest speaker at California State University Los Angeles, where his film was shown to Soren Kerk's sociology class with the question in mind, "What is Justice?" [6]

Detractors

Although the crime occurred outside his jurisdiction (in Los Angeles County, not in the city of Los Angeles), Los Angeles police chief Willie Williams wrote to Judge Mira recommending the maximum punishment for all four defendants: life in prison without the possibility of parole. [7]

In an interview with Farris' parents, his mother asks, ”How much is too much time for killing someone? For taking away and changing our lives completely, forever?” [8]

Controversy

Supporters of the defendants as well as opponents of the felony murder rule have expressed various concerns and criticisms.

Regarding the charges

Regarding the trial

Regarding the sentences

Appeals

State appeals

An appeal of the convictions and sentences to the California Court of Appeal for the Second District charged prosecutors with misconduct and presenting inadmissible evidence, including alleging that the defendants belonged to the Gumbys street gang. Among other things, the appeal also alleged that it was improper to present the earlier wallet theft to the jury; that the prosecution engaged in egregious personal attacks on defense counsel; and that the verdicts were inconsistent. It further alleged juror misconduct, judicial bias, and faulty instructions to the jury. [1] [4]

Defending the sentences, Deputy District Attorney Victoria Bedrossian argued that while only Jason Holland wielded the knife, the defendants acted "in concert." "Each appellant was a major participant who acted with reckless indifference to Jimmy Farris' life," Bedrossian said. "The sentences in this case do not offend fundamental notions of human dignity and the penalties in this case should not be changed." [4]

On 29 January 2001 the California Court of Appeal ruled that "In order to warrant reversal, it must be determined that the alleged misconduct has prejudiced appellants’ right to a fair trial. In this case, the evidence against appellants was overwhelming." The Court affirmed the convictions and sentencing of Jason Holland, Brandon Hein and Micah Holland. The special circumstance finding against Anthony Miliotti, who stood and watched, was struck from the record and his crime reduced to second-degree murder, and his case sent back to the trial court for resentencing, resulting in a new sentence of nineteen years to life. [13]

The California Supreme Court denied petitions for review on April 25, 2001. [14]

Hein filed a petition for a writ of certiorari with the United States Supreme Court, which was denied on October 1, 2001. [15]

A petition for a writ of habeas corpus with the California Supreme Court was filed on September 23, 2002, which was summarily denied on May 12, 2004. [16]

Federal appeals

Following exhaustion of their appeals in state court, Hein, Miliotti, Micah and Jason Holland filed individual Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus in the United States District Court for the Central District of California in May and July 2004. The petitions raised identical, overlapping, and separate claims: Brady violations, prosecutorial misconduct, ineffective assistance of counsel, improper exclusion or admission of evidence, juror misconduct, judicial misconduct, cruel and unusual punishment, and arbitrary and capricious sentence reduction. On April 3, 2007, the United States magistrate judge assigned to the case filed a joint Report and Recommendation, recommending that the petitions be denied. All four appellants filed objections to the Magistrate's report, but the United States District Judge adopted the Report and Recommendation without modification. Each appellant then requested a Certificate of Appealability to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, which were all granted in whole or in part by the District Court. On January 17, 2008, the Ninth Circuit Court granted a motion to consolidate the appeals of the four appellants. [17]

On October 7, 2009, the appeals were heard by a three-judge panel of the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. Attorneys for the four alleged false testimony by McLoren and misconduct by the prosecution, including failure to disclose evidence favorable to the defense. [18] [19]

On April 12, 2010, the appeals were denied, with the court acknowledging some instances of prosecutorial misconduct but saying their combined effect, along with the nondisclosure of McLoren's immunity, was not sufficient to render the trial fundamentally unfair. [13] [20]

On May 26, 2010, attorneys for Hein, Miliotti, and Jason Holland filed a "Joint Petition for Rehearing En Banc." Attorneys for Micah Holland filed a separate "Petition for Rehearing En Banc." In the petitions, the attorneys argue that the April 12 opinion by the three-judge panel "conflicts with a well-settled body of law within the Ninth Circuit," and that "En banc review is necessary to secure and maintain the uniformity of this Court's decisions." [17]

On July 16, 2010, the three-judge panel of the Ninth Circuit Court issued an order stating that "The full court has been advised of the petitions for rehearing en banc and no judge has requested a vote on whether to rehear the matter en banc. The petitions for panel rehearing and the petitions for rehearing en banc are denied." [17]

On November 15, 2010, attorneys for the four petitioners filed a petition for a writ of certiorari with the Supreme Court of the United States. The petition was denied on April 18, 2011. [21]

Commutation to 29 years to life with the possibility of parole

On March 17, 2009, Hein's sentence was commuted by Governor Schwarzenegger, from life without possibility of parole plus four years, to 29 years to life with the possibility of parole. [22] [23] Hein's "Initial Suitability Hearing" is scheduled for October 30, 2019. [24]

Current status

On September 25, 2020, Brandon Hein's murder sentence was vacated. The Honorable Yvette Verastegui, Superior Court Judge, ordered upon resentencing, “Defendant’s Penal Code Section 1170.95 petition having been granted on today’s date, his murder conviction is vacated.” [Page 1 Court finding of Case SA022108-01]

The board found that Miliotti was "not yet suitable for parole and would pose an unreasonable risk of danger or a threat to public safety if released from prison," and gave him a ten-year denial. [25] However, under Marsy's Law, a life inmate who is denied parole may, in three year intervals, request that his or her hearing be moved to an earlier date. [26] Miliotti filed a petition to advance which was approved and his next hearing was advanced from ten to seven years. His "Subsequent Parole Consideration Hearing" took place on March 8, 2018. The parole board found that, "Mr. Miliotti does not pose an unreasonable risk of danger to society or threat to public safety and is therefore suitable for parole." On December 24, 2018, Governor Edmund G. Brown Jr. commuted Jason Holland's sentence, from life without the possibility of parole plus eight years, to 30 years to life. [27] Micah Holland appeared before the Board of Parole Hearings on March 13, 2019. He was denied parole and given a seven-year denial.

Bill under consideration would require re-sentencing

As of August 16, 2018, a bill which would reduce the broad scope allowed in charging "special circumstances" had been approved by the California Senate. The bill restricts the charging of special circumstances to only those who actually commit murder or who are directly involved, and would require re-sentencing of offenders such as Hein. [28] Senate Bill 1437 was enacted on September 30, 2018. [29]

See also

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Capital punishment in Louisiana</span> Overview of the use of capital punishment in the U.S. state of Louisiana

Capital punishment is a legal penalty in the U.S. state of Louisiana.

In the United States, habitual offender laws have been implemented since at least 1952, and are part of the United States Justice Department's Anti-Violence Strategy. These laws require a person who is convicted of an offense and who has one or two other previous serious convictions to serve a mandatory life sentence in prison, with or without parole depending on the jurisdiction. The purpose of the laws is to drastically increase the punishment of those who continue to commit offenses after being convicted of one or two serious crimes.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Lionel Tate</span> American convicted of first-degree murder when he was 13 years old

Lionel Alexander Tate is the youngest American citizen ever sentenced to life imprisonment without the possibility of parole, though this sentence was eventually overturned. In January 2001, when Tate was 13, he was convicted of first-degree murder for the 1999 battering death of six-year-old Tiffany Eunick in Broward County, Florida.

Gregg v. Georgia, Proffitt v. Florida, Jurek v. Texas, Woodson v. North Carolina, and Roberts v. Louisiana, 428 U.S. 153 (1976), is a landmark decision of the U.S. Supreme Court. It reaffirmed the Court's acceptance of the use of the death penalty in the United States, upholding, in particular, the death sentence imposed on Troy Leon Gregg. The set of cases is referred to by a leading scholar as the July 2 Cases, and elsewhere referred to by the lead case Gregg. The court set forth the two main features that capital sentencing procedures must employ in order to comply with the Eighth Amendment ban on "cruel and unusual punishments". The decision essentially ended the de facto moratorium on the death penalty imposed by the Court in its 1972 decision in Furman v. Georgia 408 U.S. 238 (1972). Justice Brennan dissent famously argued that "The calculated killing of a human being by the State involves, by its very nature, a denial of the executed person's humanity... An executed person has indeed 'lost the right to have rights."

Mandatory sentencing requires that offenders serve a predefined term of imprisonment for certain crimes, commonly serious or violent offenses. Judges are bound by law; these sentences are produced through the legislature, not the judicial system. They are instituted to expedite the sentencing process and limit the possibility of irregularity of outcomes due to judicial discretion. Mandatory sentences are typically given to people who are convicted of certain serious and/or violent crimes, and require a prison sentence. Mandatory sentencing laws vary across nations; they are more prevalent in common law jurisdictions because civil law jurisdictions usually prescribe minimum and maximum sentences for every type of crime in explicit laws.

The M25 Three were Raphael Rowe, Michael George Davis, and Randolph Egbert Johnson, who were jailed for life at the Old Bailey in March 1990 after being wrongfully convicted of murder and burglary. The name was taken from the location of the crimes, which were committed around the M25, London's orbital motorway, during the early hours of 16 December 1988. The original trial took place between January and February 1990, resulting in all three being convicted of the murder of Peter Hurburgh, causing grievous bodily harm with intent to Timothy Napier and several robberies. Each was sentenced to life imprisonment for the murder and given substantial sentences for the other offences. The convictions were overturned in July 2000. All three men have consistently maintained their innocence.

Gerald "Gary" McGivern was a felon found guilty in 1967 of the armed robbery of a gas station in Pelham Manor, New York, United States, during which two police officers were wounded. McGivern was tried with his partner in the robbery, Charles Culhane, and was sentenced to ten to twenty years in state prison. On September 13, 1968, McGivern, Culhane and a third convict, Robert Bowerman, were being transported by two deputies, from Auburn State Prison to a court hearing in White Plains. During a rest stop along the New York State Thruway, a deputy's gun was seized in an attempted escape. During the struggle inside the police car, a deputy and Bowerman were shot to death.

Ewing v. California, 538 U.S. 11 (2003), is one of two cases upholding a sentence imposed under California's three strikes law against a challenge that it constituted cruel and unusual punishment in violation of the Eighth Amendment. As in its prior decision in Harmelin v. Michigan, the United States Supreme Court could not agree on the precise reasoning to uphold the sentence. But, with the decision in Ewing and the companion case Lockyer v. Andrade, the Court effectively foreclosed criminal defendants from arguing that their non-capital sentences were disproportional to the crime they had committed.

Lockyer v. Andrade, 538 U.S. 63 (2003), decided the same day as Ewing v. California, held that there would be no relief by means of a petition for a writ of habeas corpus from a sentence imposed under California's three strikes law as a violation of the Eighth Amendment's prohibition of cruel and unusual punishments. Relying on the reasoning of Ewing and Harmelin v. Michigan, the Court ruled that because no "clearly established" law held that a three-strikes sentence was cruel and unusual punishment, the 50-years-to-life sentence imposed in this case was not cruel and unusual punishment.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Murders of Channon Christian and Christopher Newsom</span> 2007 carjacking, rape, and murder of a couple in Knoxville, Tennessee

Channon Gail Christian, aged 21, and Hugh Christopher Newsom Jr., aged 23, were from Knoxville, Tennessee, United States. They were kidnapped on the evening of January 6, 2007, when Christian's vehicle was carjacked. The couple were taken to a rental house. Both of them were raped, tortured, and murdered. Four males and one female were arrested, charged, and convicted in the case. In 2007, a grand jury indicted Letalvis Darnell Cobbins, Lemaricus Devall Davidson, George Geovonni Thomas, and Vanessa Lynn Coleman on counts of kidnapping, robbery, rape, and murder. Also in 2007, Eric DeWayne Boyd was indicted by a federal grand jury of being an accessory to a carjacking, resulting in serious bodily injury to another person and misprision of a felony. In 2018, Boyd was indicted on state-level charges of kidnapping, robbery, rape, and murder.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">O. J. Simpson robbery case</span> 2008 US criminal case

State of Nevada v. Orenthal James Simpson, et al, Case Number: 07C237890-4. was a criminal case prosecuted in 2007–2008 in the U.S. state of Nevada, primarily involving the retired American football player O. J. Simpson.

The Double Jeopardy Clause of the Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution provides: "[N]or shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb..." The four essential protections included are prohibitions against, for the same offense:

Scott Edgar Dyleski is an American murderer, convicted of murdering his neighbor, Pamela Vitale, the wife of prominent attorney Daniel Horowitz. He received the maximum penalty allowed by the law, life in prison without parole. As a juvenile at the time of the murder, he did not qualify for the death penalty. The murder was committed on October 15, 2005, when Dyleski was 16 years old. He is currently serving his sentence in California State Prison, Corcoran. In 2018, Dyleski's sentence was reduced to 25 years to life in prison, after the state of California passed Senate Bill 394, which gives juveniles tried as adults and sentenced to life without parole a chance for eventual freedom. He will be eligible for parole in 2030.

In the state of California, a heavily modified version of the common law felony murder rule is codified in California Penal Code § 189.

Graham v. Florida, 560 U.S. 48 (2010), was a decision by the Supreme Court of the United States holding that juvenile offenders cannot be sentenced to life imprisonment without parole for non-homicide offenses.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Murder of Mark Fisher</span> 2003 murder in Brooklyn, New York, United States

The murder of Mark Fisher occurred in the early morning hours of October 12, 2003. Where a 19-years old college student was brutally beaten, shot five times, and left on Argyle Road in Prospect Park South, Brooklyn.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">California Innocence Project</span> American legal non-profit founded 1999

The California Innocence Project is a non-profit based at California Western School of Law in San Diego, California, United States, which provides pro bono legal services to individuals who maintain their factual innocence of crime(s) for which they have been convicted. It is an independent chapter of the Innocence Project. Its mission is to exonerate wrongly convicted inmates through the use of DNA and other evidences.

Scott Loren Sanders is an American criminal defense lawyer and an advocate for both criminal justice and police reform.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Murder in California law</span>

The law on the crime of murder in the U.S. state of California is defined by sections 187 through 191 of the California Penal Code.

Between November 1992 and September 1993, at two locations within Singapore, a group of Thai migrant workers committed armed robberies at two construction sites located in Lim Chu Kang and Tampines respectively, which resulted in the deaths of three foreign construction workers, one Myanmar citizen in November 1992 and two Indian citizens in September 1993. Five of these assailants were eventually identified and arrested, and brought to trial for the robbery-murders. In two separate trials, all the five accused were found guilty of gang robbery with murder, and sentenced to death in early 1995. These five men were eventually hanged on 15 March 1996.

References

  1. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Appeal from the judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County (PDF, 33 pages), January 29, 2001
  2. Chief Justice Rose Bird ProCon - Special Circumstances Archived March 3, 2016, at the Wayback Machine
  3. "Teen Gets 11 Years in Agoura Killing". Los Angeles Daily News. September 7, 1996.
  4. 1 2 3 4 5 6 Appeals underway in local murder case, The Acorn, December 14, 2000 Archived July 6, 2008, at the Wayback Machine
  5. https://www.toacorn.com/articles/brandon-hein-granted-parole/ Teen convicted under felony murder rule granted parole at age 42
  6. 1 2 Reckless Indifference film site - discussion and trailer Archived October 5, 2016, at the Wayback Machine
  7. brandonhein.com - Willie Williams' sentencing recommendations
  8. 1 2 Life In Prison: Felony Murder, CBS, Jan. 29, 2003 Archived February 29, 2012, at the Wayback Machine
  9. 1 2 3 DVDtalk review, Reckless Indifference
  10. 1 2 Martinez, Al (November 17, 2006). "Dad holds hope for imprisoned son". Los Angeles Times .
  11. 1 2 New York Times review, Reckless Indifference [ permanent dead link ]
  12. Variety.com review, Reckless Indifference Archived March 3, 2016, at the Wayback Machine
  13. 1 2 3 Court: State's Nondisclosure of Immunity Deal Not Prejudicial Archived March 3, 2016, at the Wayback Machine , Metropolitan News-Enterprise, April 13, 2010
  14. California Courts - Appellate Court Case Information - Supreme Court - Supreme Court Case: S095461
  15. California Courts - Appellate Court Case Information - 2nd Appellate District - Court of Appeal Case: B106689
  16. California Courts - Appellate Court Case Information - Supreme Court - Supreme Court Case: S110116
  17. 1 2 3 Administrative Office of the U. S. Courts, PACER Service Center Archived May 13, 2010, at the Wayback Machine
  18. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit: Hein v. Sullivan - Recording of the oral arguments Archived March 5, 2012, at the Wayback Machine
  19. "Oct. 7, 2009 Oral Arguments", Brandon Hein blog maintained by his parents, October 11, 2009
  20. Hein v. Sullivan, United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit Archived February 25, 2012, at the Wayback Machine , April 12, 2010
  21. "United States Supreme Court: Hein v. Sullivan - Docket" Archived March 3, 2016, at the Wayback Machine
  22. Wrong Place, Wrong Time Archived February 12, 2010, at the Wayback Machine , NewsWeek , August 15, 2009
  23. "Newsweek article about Brandon", Brandon Hein blog maintained by his parents, August 17, 2009
  24. Board of Parole Hearings - Hearing Schedule October 2019
  25. Transcript of "Initial Suitability Hearing."
  26. "Board of Parole Hearings - Lifer Parole Process" Archived December 23, 2016, at the Wayback Machine
  27. 2018 Executive Report on Pardons, Commutations of Sentence and Reprieves (Pp. 2106-2131)
  28. Thompson, Don (August 16, 2018). "California considers limiting broad 'felony murder' law". Associated Press. Archived from the original on August 20, 2018. Retrieved August 20, 2018.
  29. "Bill Text - SB-1437 Accomplice liability for felony murder".

Further reading