SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

FOR THE COUNTY OF PLACER

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA, Case No. RCR-44075

Plaintiff,
v. RULING ON PEOPLE’S CHALLENGES TO THE
BRIAN RETTMAN, CONSTITUTIONALITY OF P.C. § 1170.95
Defendant.

Petitioner, BRIAN RETTMAN, on March 6, 2019, filed a petition for resentencing of his
murder conviction under the newly enacted provisions of Penal Code, section 1170.951 (SB
1437). By stipulation of the parties, the issue of the constitutionality of SB 1437 is bifurcated
from the factual determination of petitioner’s eligibility for relief under section 1170.95, and is
to be decided first.
Both parties have submitted briefs on the constitutional issues. The matter was set for
argument on August 13, 2019. Additional briefing was ordered on a specified issue, such briefs
being due November 1, 2019. Both parties submitted the supplemental briefing and the matter
of the constitutionality of SB 1437 now stands submitted for decision.
Following submission of the matter the Court of Appeal issued its decision in two cases:
People v. Lamoureux (2019) ___ Cal.App.5th ___ [D075794], and People v. Superior Court
(Gooden)(2019) ___ Cal.App.5th ___ [D075787/D075790]. The opinions address and reject each
of the constitutional challenges the People raise in the current case. The opinions determine

1
Unless otherwise specified, all further statutory references are to the Penal Code.

1
that SB 1437 was lawfully enacted by the Legislature. Not only is this court bound to follow the
decision of a higher court on the issues presented here, this court finds the reasoning of the
higher court to be a valid and a proper interpretation of the law.2 Accordingly, for the reasons
stated in Lamoureux and Gooden, the People’s constitutional objections to SB 1437 are
overruled.
Counsel are invited to contact this court by email to coordinate the setting of a hearing
on the merits of the petition.

Dated: November 20, 2019 _____________________________________

J. RICHARD COUZENS
Judge of the Placer County Superior Court (Ret.)

2
In acknowledgment that the decisions in Lamoureux and Gooden are not final, that there are differing opinions
on the constitutionality of SB 1437 as evidenced by the dissenting opinion in these cases, and because the
California Supreme Court likely will be heard later on these issues, this court felt it advisable to enter its own ruling
on the issues even without the application of the principles of stare decisis.