Other than agreeing to hear a significant voting rights case — the only straight grant of the day — and denying review in a big-verdict products liability case, the Supreme Court did not generate much news at its conference yesterday.  Additional actions of note included:

  • The court denied review in People v. Mirmon, but it depublished the Fourth District, Division Two, Court of Appeal’s short opinion.  The appellate court expressly disagreed with a 32-year-old Fifth District decision — People v. Arant (1988) 199 Cal.App.3d 294 — and held that a superior court had no discretion to impose anything other than a consecutive sentence for a felony committed in prison.  The Arant court, in turn, had disapproved one of its own opinions.
  • There were 7 criminal case grant-and-holds:  four more holding for a decision in People v. Lewis (see here); one more holding for People v. Lemcke (originally People v. Rudd) (see here); one holding for In re A.R. (see here); and one holding for People v. Vivar (see here).
  • The court dismissed review in Facebook v. Superior Court (Hunter), which was a grant-and-hold waiting for the August decision in Facebook, Inc. v. Superior Court (Touchstone).  (See also here, here, and here.)
  • [October 23 update:  the case holding for In re A.R. is not a criminal case, as stated above.  It’s a dependency case.  The matter is In re A.M., in which the Fourth District, Division Two, dismissed a mother’s appeal as untimely.  The issues in A.R. are:  “1. Does a parent in a juvenile dependency case have the right to challenge her counsel’s failure to file a timely notice of appeal from an order terminating her parental rights under Welfare and Institutions Code section 366.26?  (See Welf. & Inst. Code, § 317.5, subd. (a); In re Kristin H. (1996) 46 Cal.App.4th 1635 [ineffective assistance of counsel claim in dependency proceeding brought on a petition for writ of habeas corpus].)  2. If so, what are the proper procedures for raising such a claim?”]