{"id":3904,"date":"2021-06-02T11:55:15","date_gmt":"2021-06-02T18:55:15","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/?p=3904"},"modified":"2021-06-02T12:25:34","modified_gmt":"2021-06-02T19:25:34","slug":"california-supreme-court-hears-arguments-challenging-death-penalty-law","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/?p=3904","title":{"rendered":"California Supreme Court Hears Argument Challenging Death Penalty Law"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>The California Supreme Court heard oral argument today in <strong>People v. McDaniel<\/strong>.\u00a0 Donte McDaniel was convicted in 2009 of two brutal murders and attempted murder on two others.\u00a0 In 2004, McDaniel and his accomplice entered a woman\u2019s Los Angeles apartment looking for a man who had stolen drugs from another member of the gang he belongs to, the Bounty Hunter Bloods (BHB). McDaniel began firing as he walked in the door, shooting and killing the woman, then shooting the man he was looking for\u00a0 so may times in the head that his face collapsed.\u00a0 He shot two other women in the apartment, not involved in the drug dispute, critically injuring them both and leaving them permanently disabled.<\/p>\n<p><!--more--><\/p>\n<p>McDaniel has asked the court to rule that the state&#8217;s death penalty law has not been properly enforced since it was enacted 43 years ago.\u00a0 He insists that jurors should have been required to find every aggravating factor, such as killing multiple victims, true &#8220;beyond a reasonable doubt&#8221; and find that a death sentence is appropriate &#8220;beyond a reasonable doubt.&#8221;\u00a0\u00a0 <a href=\"https:\/\/www.sacbee.com\/news\/california\/article251821988.html\">This article <\/a>in The Sacramento Bee quotes CJLF Legal Director, Kent Scheidegger noting that if the court accepts the murderer&#8217;s argument, \u201c[it could have] devastating effects on hard-won judgements for horrible crimes.\u201d Mr. Scheidegger argues in his brief:<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>Nothing in California legal history, English Common Law, or the 1978 death penalty ballot measure (adopted by 71% of voters), suggest that jurors are required to find the aggravating factors in a murder case or the appropriateness of a death sentence \u201cbeyond a reasonable doubt\u201d. McDaniel\u2019s claimed requirement would toss out precedents that go back over 40 years for the aggravating circumstances and decades longer for penalty verdict\u2026<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>Nobody knows how a jury would go about sentencing a murderer to death beyond a reasonable doubt, which has always been the standard for determining guilt.\u00a0 The CJLF brief in this case is available <a href=\"http:\/\/www.cjlf.org\/program\/briefs\/McDanielD.pdf\">here<\/a>.\u00a0 The CA Supreme Court has 90 days from the day of argument to issue a ruling.\u00a0<span class=\"Apple-converted-space\"><br \/>\n<\/span><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>The California Supreme Court heard oral argument today in People v. McDaniel.\u00a0 Donte McDaniel was convicted in 2009 of two brutal murders and attempted murder on two others.\u00a0 In 2004, McDaniel and his accomplice entered a woman\u2019s Los Angeles apartment looking for a man who had stolen drugs from another member of the gang he belongs to, the Bounty Hunter Bloods (BHB). McDaniel began firing as he walked in the door, shooting and killing the woman, then shooting the man he was looking for\u00a0 so may times in the head that his face collapsed.\u00a0 He shot two other women in the apartment, not involved in the drug dispute, critically injuring them both and leaving them permanently disabled.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":33,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[3,13,14,40,52],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-3904","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-appeal","category-criminal-procedure","category-death-penalty","category-policy","category-state-courts"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v25.8 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/wordpress\/plugins\/seo\/ -->\n<title>California Supreme Court Hears Argument Challenging Death Penalty Law - Crime &amp; Consequences<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/?p=3904\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"California Supreme Court Hears Argument Challenging Death Penalty Law - Crime &amp; Consequences\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"The California Supreme Court heard oral argument today in People v. McDaniel.\u00a0 Donte McDaniel was convicted in 2009 of two brutal murders and attempted murder on two others.\u00a0 In 2004, McDaniel and his accomplice entered a woman\u2019s Los Angeles apartment looking for a man who had stolen drugs from another member of the gang he belongs to, the Bounty Hunter Bloods (BHB). McDaniel began firing as he walked in the door, shooting and killing the woman, then shooting the man he was looking for\u00a0 so may times in the head that his face collapsed.\u00a0 He shot two other women in the apartment, not involved in the drug dispute, critically injuring them both and leaving them permanently disabled.\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/?p=3904\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Crime &amp; Consequences\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/CriminalJusticeLegalFoundation\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2021-06-02T18:55:15+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2021-06-02T19:25:34+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/07\/FB_DefaultLJ.png\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"300\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"400\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/png\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Amber Westbrook\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Amber Westbrook\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"2 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/?p=3904\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/?p=3904\",\"name\":\"California Supreme Court Hears Argument Challenging Death Penalty Law - Crime &amp; Consequences\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2021-06-02T18:55:15+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2021-06-02T19:25:34+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/#\/schema\/person\/4bd553c445bd8bccb8db0b7cc239103e\"},\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/?p=3904#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/?p=3904\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/?p=3904#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"California Supreme Court Hears Argument Challenging Death Penalty Law\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/\",\"name\":\"Crime &amp; Consequences\",\"description\":\"Crime and criminal law\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/#\/schema\/person\/4bd553c445bd8bccb8db0b7cc239103e\",\"name\":\"Amber Westbrook\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/?author=33\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"California Supreme Court Hears Argument Challenging Death Penalty Law - Crime &amp; Consequences","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/?p=3904","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"California Supreme Court Hears Argument Challenging Death Penalty Law - Crime &amp; Consequences","og_description":"The California Supreme Court heard oral argument today in People v. McDaniel.\u00a0 Donte McDaniel was convicted in 2009 of two brutal murders and attempted murder on two others.\u00a0 In 2004, McDaniel and his accomplice entered a woman\u2019s Los Angeles apartment looking for a man who had stolen drugs from another member of the gang he belongs to, the Bounty Hunter Bloods (BHB). McDaniel began firing as he walked in the door, shooting and killing the woman, then shooting the man he was looking for\u00a0 so may times in the head that his face collapsed.\u00a0 He shot two other women in the apartment, not involved in the drug dispute, critically injuring them both and leaving them permanently disabled.","og_url":"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/?p=3904","og_site_name":"Crime &amp; Consequences","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/CriminalJusticeLegalFoundation\/","article_published_time":"2021-06-02T18:55:15+00:00","article_modified_time":"2021-06-02T19:25:34+00:00","og_image":[{"width":300,"height":400,"url":"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/07\/FB_DefaultLJ.png","type":"image\/png"}],"author":"Amber Westbrook","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Amber Westbrook","Est. reading time":"2 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/?p=3904","url":"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/?p=3904","name":"California Supreme Court Hears Argument Challenging Death Penalty Law - Crime &amp; Consequences","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/#website"},"datePublished":"2021-06-02T18:55:15+00:00","dateModified":"2021-06-02T19:25:34+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/#\/schema\/person\/4bd553c445bd8bccb8db0b7cc239103e"},"breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/?p=3904#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/?p=3904"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/?p=3904#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"California Supreme Court Hears Argument Challenging Death Penalty Law"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/","name":"Crime &amp; Consequences","description":"Crime and criminal law","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/#\/schema\/person\/4bd553c445bd8bccb8db0b7cc239103e","name":"Amber Westbrook","url":"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/?author=33"}]}},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3904","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/33"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=3904"}],"version-history":[{"count":8,"href":"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3904\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":3913,"href":"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3904\/revisions\/3913"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=3904"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=3904"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=3904"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}