Monday, October 10, 2016

In Re C.H. (Cal. Ct. App. - Aug. 30, 2016)

No opinions on Columbus Day.  We're too busy discovering new (legal) lands.

Maybe this opinion will give rise to one of those new lands.  Or at least resolve the conflicting claims about them.

Justice Siggins says:

"For the foregoing reasons, we agree with the holding of our colleagues in Division One in In re J.C. (2016) 246 Cal.App.4th 1462, and respectfully disagree with the courts who have held that redesignation of a felony as a misdemeanor under section 1170.18 requires expungement of an offender’s DNA and profile from the state database. (See Alejandro N. v. Superior Court (2015) 238 Cal.App.4th 1209.) Redesignation of a felony to a misdemeanor under section 1170.18 does not require expungement."

Given these multiple conflicting authorities, the California Supreme Court should grant review and sort it all out.  Whether the state gets to keep your DNA shouldn't depend on the particular appellate panel you happen to draw.