Criminal
Sep. 18, 2026
Unusual publication puts justice's Racial Justice Act concurrence in spotlight
Appellate attorneys say Justice Jon B. Streeter's 49-page concurrence carries no precedential weight but could influence lawmakers considering whether to revisit the Racial Justice Act after People v. Hazlett.
In an unusual action, a 1st District Court of Appeal panel published only the introduction to its opinion in a Racial Justice Act case -- leaving the background and substantive legal analysis unpublished -- largely to provide context for a justice's 49-page concurrence questioning a recent California Supreme Court ruling.
The partially published opinion in In re: Haney, A170412, begins conventionally enough, explaining the claims of state prisoner Monte Haney and four ...
For only $95 a month (the price of 2 article purchases)
Receive unlimited article access and full access to our archives,
Daily Appellate Report, award winning columns, and our
Verdicts and Settlements.
Or
$895, but save $100 when you subscribe today… Just $795 for the first year!
Or access this article for $45
(Purchase provides 7-day access to this article. Printing, posting or downloading is not allowed.)
Already a subscriber?
Sign In