No. 25-6654
Kyle Shirakawa Handley v. Christopher Pierce, Warden
IFP
Tags: california-law criminal-procedure due-process notice-requirement sentencing-enhancement sixth-amendment
Key Terms:
DueProcess HabeasCorpus JusticiabilityDoctri
DueProcess HabeasCorpus JusticiabilityDoctri
Latest Conference:
N/A
Question Presented (from Petition)
1. Does the California Supreme Court's 1936 holding that a defendant's right to notice does not apply to facts which merely "increase the penalty" violate the Sixth Amendment?
2. Can constitutionally adequate notice of enhanced charges be given at the end of trial, or must notice be given in a manner that affords defendants an opportunity to prepare before trial?
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Does the California Supreme Court's 1936 holding that a defendant's right to notice does not apply to facts which merely 'increase the penalty' violate the Sixth Amendment?
Docket Entries
2025-12-19
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due February 23, 2026)
Attorneys
Kyle Handley
Clifford Gardner — Law Office of Cliff Gardner, Petitioner