Post-Conviction Relief In Light Of Menendez Brothers’ Legal Battle For Resentencing

In recent years, the California Legislature has been very proactive in introducing significant changes to the state’s sentencing laws in an effort to rectify the devastating results caused by the state’s tough-on-crime policies, which have led to excessively punitive sentences and have had an extremely harmful effect on poor and minority communities. In addition, long sentences have not only failed to increase public safety, but have also had a damaging effect on vulnerable individuals, especially those who have committed their offenses as minors or young adults.

One such law is Assembly Bill 2942, which went into effect on January 1, 2019, and was codified in Penal Code Section 1172.1. The new law granted district attorneys the discretionary power to revisit cases and determine whether further incarceration is actually in the interest of justice, and if it is not, the district attorneys now have the right to make a recommendation to the court for resentencing.

Under PC 1172.1, once a district attorney makes a recommendation, the court has discretionary power to determine whether to grant a recall hearing. The law instructs the courts to consider the disciplinary and rehabilitation records of defendants; evidence of age, physical condition and time served to determine whether the risk of future violence has been reduced; evidence of changed circumstances that would render a continued incarceration a miscarriage of justice; and finally, the court can consider new laws passed that would result in a shorter sentence, including the invalidation of certain enhancements.    

If you have questions about AB 2942 and your eligibility, contact our California appeals attorneys today for a case evaluation locally at (310) 914-2444 or at our Toll-Free number at (866) 695-6714, or click here.

In the past few months, the district attorneys’ discretionary power under PC 1172.1, has been in the public eye more than ever due to the renewed legal battle by the Menendez Brothers to be resentenced.  In May 2023, the brothers filed a habeas corpus petition based on a couple of pieces of new evidence. In early October 2024, the now-former Los Angeles District Attorney, George Gascon, announced that the Los Angeles DA’s office is reviewing the brothers’ petition.

A few weeks later, Gascon announced that he would recommend to the court to resentence the Menendez Brothers to 50 years to life in lieu of the life sentence without the possibility of parole they are currently serving. This would have made the brothers eligible for parole under the Youth Offender Parole provisions as they were under the age of 26 when they committed the crimes.

Gascon based his decision on a number of factors, including the brothers well-documented rehabilitation efforts in prison, with the brothers obtaining educational degrees and being involved in both community and prison programs; the history of abuse and trauma that contributed to the crime; as well as their age at the time of committing the crime.

In November 2024, Californians voted George Gascon out of office, and chose Nathan Hochman as the new Los Angeles Country District Attorney.  Mr. Hochman immediately stated that he would review all the facts before making his own determination. On March 10, 2025, just a couple of weeks prior to the brothers’ next hearing, the new LA County DA announced that his office has filed a request to withdraw the resentencing motion filed by his predecessor.

With that announcement, Mr. Hochman basically set the new standard under which his office would judge potential requests for resentencing. While the new District Attorney acknowledged that there are many factors justifying resentencing, these factors are not sufficient enough to warrant a recall and resentencing recommendation, unless the brothers also shows full insight and completely, sincerely, and unequivocally accept responsibility for their criminal actions.

Mr. Hochman cited governor Newsom’s decision and reasoning of denying parole to Sirhan Sirhan, who is in prison for the killing of Robert F. Kennedy, as a benchmark and a precedent that courts and district attorneys should consider when deciding whether to grant a resentencing hearing. In the Sirhan case, the governor, while acknowledging the rehabilitation efforts and achievements of Mr. Sirhan, still denied parole because Sirhan’s failure to exhibit insight and accept responsibility made him an unreasonable risk of danger to the community.   

There are a number of alternatives to direct appeal, and AB 2942 provides a way to reduce your original sentence.  And while Californians’ attitude towards criminal justice reform remains positive and is a bright light for people serving excessive sentences, the new Los Angeles County DA’s decision in the Menendez brothers case is proof that the burden of showing that a resentencing in a given case is in the interest of justice has been raised. 

Given the huge impact that a potential resentencing hearing could have on a defendant’s life, it is vital that you hire an experienced appeals attorney who specializes in post-conviction matters.  At the Justice Firm, we work hard for all of our clients, and hiring the right attorney ensures that your case is presented in the most convincing way possible and will show why a resentencing in your case would serve the interests of justice.

If you have questions about recent developments in resentencing and your eligibility, contact our California appeals attorneys today for a case evaluation locally at (310) 914-2444 or at our Toll-Free number at (866) 695-6714, or click here