Tomorrow morning, the Supreme Court will file its opinions in National Shooting Sports Foundation, Inc. v. State of California, People v. Lopez, and People v. Anderson, all of which were argued on the April calendar. (Briefs here; oral argument videos here, here, and here.)
The National Shooting case raises these questions: (1) Can a statute be challenged on the ground that compliance with it is allegedly impossible? (2) If so, how is the trial court to make that determination? Although not apparent from the statement of the issues, the statute involved requires certain pistols to have “a microscopic array of characters that identify the make, model, and serial number of the pistol, etched or otherwise imprinted in two or more places on the interior surface or internal working parts of the pistol, and that are transferred by imprinting on each cartridge case when the firearm is fired.” (Second District, Division Four, Court of Appeal Presiding Justice Norman Epstein is the pro tem.)
Lopez is an automatic direct appeal from a July 2001 judgment of death. (Fourth District, Division Three, Justice Richard Fybel is the pro tem.)
Anderson is an automatic direct appeal from an October 2005 judgment of death. (Second District, Division Six, Presiding Justice Arthur Gilbert is the pro tem.)
The three opinions can be viewed tomorrow starting at 10:00 a.m.