Source: https://newsroom.courts.ca.gov/calendar/supr
Timestamp: 2019-04-25 02:02:37+00:00

Document:
Warren Building, 350 McAllister Street, Fourth Floor, San Francisco, California, on October 2 and 3, 2017.
#16-199 T.H., a Minor, et al. v. Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation, S233898. (D067839; 245 Cal.App.4th 589; Superior Court of San Diego County; 37-2013-00070440-CU-MM-CTL.) Petition for review after the Court of Appeal reversed an order in a civil action. The court limited review to the following issue: May the brand name manufacturer of a pharmaceutical drug that divested all ownership interest in the drug be held liable for injuries caused years later by another manufacturer’s generic version of that drug?
#16-269 Kurwa (Badrudin) v. Kislinger (Mark B.), et al., S234617. (B264641; nonpublished opinion; Superior Court of Los Angeles County; KC045216.) Petition for review after the Court of Appeal dismissed an appeal in a civil action. This case presents the following issue: Can plaintiff take an appeal in the current posture of this litigation?
#16-295 Jackson (Patrick Lowell) v. Superior Court of Riverside County (People, Real Party in Interest), S235549. (E064010; 247 Cal.App.4th 767; Superior Court of Riverside County; INF1500950.) Petition for review after the Court of Appeal denied a petition for writ of peremptory mandate or prohibition. This case presents the following issue: After an incompetent defendant has reached the maximum three-year commitment provided for by law, can the prosecution initiate a new competency proceeding by obtaining dismissal of the original complaint and proceeding on a new charging document?
#16-38 People v. Gallardo (Sulma Marilyn), S231260. (B257357; nonpublished opinion; Superior Court of Los Angeles County; VA126705.) Petition for review after the Court of Appeal affirmed in part and reversed in part a judgment of conviction of criminal offenses. The court limited review to the following issue: Was the trial court’s decision that defendant’s prior conviction constituted a strike incompatible with Descamps v. U.S. (2013) 570 U.S. __ (133 S.Ct. 2276) because the trial court relied on judicial fact-finding beyond the elements of the actual prior conviction?
#15-46 People v. Contreras (Leonel), et al., S224564. (D063428; nonpublished opinion; Superior Court of San Diego County; SCD236438.) Petition for review after the Court of Appeal remanded for resentencing and otherwise affirmed a judgment of conviction of criminal offenses. This case presents the following issue: Is a total sentence of 50 years to life or 58 years to life the functional equivalent of life without the possibility of parole for a juvenile offender within the meaning of the Eighth Amendment?
This matter is an automatic appeal from a judgment of death.
#16-362 People v. Frierson (James Belton), S236728. (B260774; 1 Cal.App.5th 788; Superior Court of Los Angeles County; GA043389.) Petition for review after the Court of Appeal affirmed an order denying a petition to recall sentence. The court limited review to the following issue: What is the standard of proof for a finding of ineligibility for resentencing under Proposition 36? (See People v. Arevalo (2016) 244 Cal.App.4th 836; cf. People v. Osuna (2014) 225 Cal.App.4th 1020)?

References: v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v.