The Supreme Court today granted the petition for review in Nazir v. Superior Court, but sent the case back to the Second District, Division Seven, Court of Appeal, which had summarily denied the criminal defendant’s writ petition in the case. The appellate court will now decide the writ petition’s merits in a written opinion after briefing and oral argument.
The writ proceeding has attracted more publicity than most. The superior court refused to allow new Los Angeles District Attorney George Gascón to withdraw sentence enhancements filed against the defendant, Rehan Nazir, by Gascón’s predecessor. When Nazir sought Supreme Court review, Gascón wrote in support, as did 69 current and former elected prosecutors and attorneys general from California and around the country, and also the Los Angeles Times editorial board.
Because the defendant and the prosecution are in agreement on the sentence enhancements issue, the appellate court might direct the superior court itself to defend its ruling; or the appellate court could rely on amicus curiae, if any, to do so (see here). Usually, superior courts stay out of writ proceedings challenging their decisions, even though those courts are respondents in writ petitions. (See here.)
Related:
A push to have the Supreme Court review the denial of DA’s motion to withdraw sentence enhancements
Tyler Pialet in the Daily Journal: “Gascón urges state high court to review defense appeal.”