Did it really make sense for the San Francisco District Attorney's Office to bring this appeal?
It's a high-profile matter, and involves the conviction of David DePape for smashing the head of Paul Pelosi, the husband of Nancy Pelosi, during DePape's attempted kidnapping of Nancy. Shortly before DePape went on trial in state court, he was convicted in federal court for similar (federal) offenses, so he moved to dismiss some of the state court charges against him on statutory double jeopardy grounds. The trial court agreed, dismissing five of the eight counts against DePape. The SF District Attorney's Office then filed a writ and, ultimately, an appeal.
I get that the District Attorney was miffed. The double jeopardy issue is a tough one. Which is, in part, why there's a split opinion on appeal. There's an argument that the trial court got it wrong -- not a totally obvious one, but an argument nonetheless. Hence at least the facial need to file an appeal.
But can we step aside for a second to address the practical realities here?
DePape was already convicted in federal court and sentenced to 30 years in prison. He's 46 years old now. This is federal time, so even if we're only looking at the federal convictions, he's not getting out anytime soon (if ever).
But that's not all. Three of the eight state court charges against DePape went forward at trial. And at that trial, DePape was convicted of those charges -- none of which are at issue in today's appeal -- and received life without the possibility of parole as a result.
As a result, DePape is already in prison. Forever. Even in a Bizarro-World scenario in which President Trump grants a federal pardon because he too would like to have smashed Nancy Pelosi on the head with a hammer -- and I sincerely wish that ludicrous scenario was radically more absurd than it might actually be in the present political climate -- DePape would still remain in a California prison for the rest of his life regardless of the outcome of the present appeal.
Given that reality, does it really make sense to spend time and money prosecuting an appeal on a legal issue that's entirely specific to one guy and that practically matters not in the slightest?
(Especially when the SF DA's Office ultimately loses that appeal, thereby entrenching the trial court's otherwise nonprecedential opinion into a published Court of Appeal opinion?)
At some point, just take the W and go home.
