The California Supreme Court, 2020-2021: Tracking the Impact of the Pandemic

• Jurisdiction: California,United States
• Citation: Vol. 34 No. 3
• Publication year: 2021
• Author: By Kirk C. Jenkins
• topic: Criminal procedure

The California Supreme Court, 2020-2021: Tracking the Impact of the Pandemic

By Kirk C. Jenkins

Kirk C. Jenkins is Senior Counsel at Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer LLP in San Francisco, and is the President of the California Academy of Appellate Lawyers.

Although there was comparatively little time in Judicial Year 2019-2020 for the coronavirus pandemic to impact the Court's workload given that a national emergency was not declared until March 2020, the story of the California Supreme Court for JY2021 was the same as the dominant story for nearly everyone around the world: coping with the pandemic.

The pandemic's impact was clear in the JY2021 data. The Court's production of opinions was down sharply: only 56 decisions — 37 criminal and only 19 civil. This compares to 77 decisions in JY2020 (43 criminal, 34 civil), 75 in JY2019 (43 criminal, 32 civil), 85 in JY2018 (49 criminal, 36 civil) and 90 in JY2017 (44 criminal, 46 civil). Thus, the Court's workload was down 28% in a single year. The explanation isn't difficult to fathom. Criminal defendants have the right to a speedy trial, which at least somewhat limits a trial judge's ability to postpone trial dates. Civil parties have no correlative right. Accordingly, the Court's criminal production was down only about 14%, while civil cases dropped 42% from the two preceding years.

There was no similar drop-off in the Court's death penalty caseload. For JY2021, the Supreme Court reviewed 15 death penalty decisions. The Court affirmed 10 of those decisions in all respects. Three decisions were reversed in part but the penalty affirmed. One decision was reversed in part and the penalty reversed, and one case was reversed outright. We'll get to lag time data shortly, but there's no real indication in the data that Proposition 66 has caused the Court's death penalty production to increase much; the Court published 19 death cases in JY2018, 20 in JY2019 and 17 in JY2020 before the slight drop this year. Since JY2012, the Court has reviewed 190 death penalty cases. The Court affirmed in all respects in 132, i.e., 69.47% of the total. The Court reversed in part while affirming the penalty in an additional 31 cases (16.32%). In 20 cases, the Court reversed in part while reversing the penalty, accounting for 10.53% of the total. Finally, the Court has reversed completely in

[Page 8]

only seven cases (3.68%). The shift to a more Democratic Court has not significantly impacted the penalty reversal rate. For JY2021, 13.33% of the death penalty cases were either reversed in part with the penalty reversed or reversed outright. For JY2017, penalty reversals accounted for 14.29% of the docket. In the years between, the number was all over the place: down to 5.26% in JY2018, up to 20% for JY2019 and back down to 11.76% in JY2020.

As always, Los Angeles County was the largest single source of both civil and criminal cases making the Court's docket. Los Angeles accounted for six civil cases. Certified questions from the United States District Court for the Northern District of California produced three. San Bernardino and San Diego Counties accounted for two each. Six counties produced one case each: Alameda, Orange, Riverside, San Joaquin, San Mateo and Santa Clara.

On the criminal side, Los Angeles produced a dozen cases. Five counties were tied for second place with three cases: Alameda, Orange, Riverside, San Francisco and Ventura. Kern and San Bernardino Counties accounted for two cases apiece. Five counties produced one case each: Contra Costa, Sacramento, San Diego, Sonoma and Stanislaus.

Six civil cases arose from the Second District—two each from Divisions Seven and Eight and one apiece from Two and Three. Another six cases came from the Fourth District—three from Division Two, two from Division One and one from Division Three. Only...