Someone can be guilty of a crime even if they are not the murderer. After reading this, you will know what happens in a criminal court during SB 1437 proceedings.

How does SB 1437 Proceeding occur in Criminal Court?

The judge determines in private whether the petitioner has established a prima facie case for relief before a resentencing hearing under Senate Bill 1437. The criminal court schedules an order to show cause hearing for resentencing of this case. The petitioner may next submit a reply to the prosecution’s opposition to resentencing, which will have time to respond. Hearing then follows that.

What happens during proceedings?

SB 1437 states that a participant in a felony that ends in death is only guilty of murder if they are the direct, actual killer, assisted the real killer in the killing with the purpose to kill, or was a substantial player in the offense and acted carelessly toward human life.

This is typically accomplished by demonstrating that the jury verdict was based on a finding that someone else was the actual killer but that the jury found the defendant was vicariously liable for murder because they were an aider and abettor to the real killer or participated in some manner such that the natural and probable consequences of their actions led to the murder. The judge “must issue an order to show cause” if the petition exhibits a prima facie case for relief, requiring the prosecution to demonstrate why the petitioner is ineligible for resentencing.

The defendant may then submit a response to the People’s opposition to the petition to clarify the issues for the criminal court judge to consider during the hearing. The People’s opposition would probably claim that the jury determined the defendant was a significant participant in the criminal and acted with reckless disregard for human life or that the jury found the defendant had the purpose of killing the victim when they helped the actual killer.

The opposition may demonstrate that the prosecution relied on the outdated notion of felony murder but that the defendant’s purpose to participate went well beyond the unaware. The opposition can prove that the defendant/petitioner and the real killer had a joint plan or agreement to conduct the crime.