In re Guice CA6
In a petition for writ of habeas corpus, petitioner Stephen Guice contended that a regulation promulgated by the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (CDCR) that excludes inmates currently serving a term for a violent felony offense from nonviolent offender early parole consideration was contrary to article I, section 32, the constitutional provision mandating early parole consideration that was enacted by voters through their approval of Proposition 57. Petitioner, who is currently convicted of one violent and several nonviolent felony offenses, asserted that under section 32’s plain language, he is entitled to nonviolent offender early parole consideration because he has completed serving the full term for his primary, nonviolent offense.
In an opinion filed July 21, 2021, this court held that CDCR’s regulation was a reasonable interpretation of section 32 and denied the petition.
Comments on In re Guice CA6