On Monday morning, the Supreme Court will file its opinions in In re Friend and Conservatorship of K.P., which were argued in April.  (Briefs here; oral argument video here and here.)

Opinions in the two other undecided April calendar cases should file on Thursday.  After Monday, there will be 21 cases left in the summer pipeline.

Friend should answer some questions about how Proposition 66 works.  That’s the 2016 ballot measure — mostly upheld by the court in 2017 — that was designed to expedite executions in California.  When the court granted review in September 2019, it limited the issues to:   “(1) Is the dismissal of a condemned inmate’s habeas corpus petition pursuant to Penal Code section 1509, subdivision (d) an appealable order and subject to the requirement of obtaining a certificate of appealability under Penal Code section 1509.1, subdivision (c), which applies to the ‘decision of the superior court denying relief on a successive petition’? (italics added); (2) What is the meaning of the term ‘successive petition’ in Penal Code section 1509, subdivision (d), and is the habeas corpus petition at issue a successive petition?; (3) If the habeas corpus petition at issue is a successive petition within the meaning of the statute, can the statutory provisions governing such petitions be applied to this petition when petitioner’s first habeas corpus petition was filed before the statutes took effect (see, e.g., Landgraf v. USI Film Products (1994) 511 U.S. 244, 269-270)?”  (Links added.)

In K.P., the court limited the issue to:  “Must the trier of fact find, beyond a reasonable doubt, that the objector is unwilling or unable voluntarily to accept meaningful treatment before a conservator may be appointed, or reappointed, under the Lanterman-Petris-Short Act?”  The court granted review in November 2019.

The opinions can be viewed Monday starting at 10:00 a.m.