California Legal Brief

The Rule of People v. Haddock and Frank is that defendants establish a prima facie showing under the Racial Justice Act when they present factual allegations that, if true, would demonstrate a substantial likelihood of a violation, without requiring proof of their truth or prejudice analysis, under circumstances where an attorney's presentation of racially charged material to the jury exceeds the narrow exception for relating relevant third-party statements.

Appeal from orders following remand in Superior Court, San Diego County.

Defendant Appellants were Donte Jerome Haddock and Anthony Constantin Frank — gang members who were charged with shooting deaths in 2011 and 2013.

Plaintiff Respondent was The People — the prosecution seeking to uphold murder convictions and deny new trial motions.

The suit sounded in criminal murder charges with gang enhancements. Appellants filed motions for new trial under Evidence Code section 352.2 and the Racial Justice Act following remand when gang enhancements were vacated.

The key substantive facts leading to the suit were that appellants, members of Lincoln Park Bloods gang, were convicted of two murders and conspiracy charges. A rap song by gang member Glenn containing racially charged language and violent lyrics was admitted at trial, allegedly including an introduction with gunshot sounds and racial slurs that may have been played to the jury despite court orders excluding it.

The procedural result leading to the Appeal: The trial court denied appellants' motions for new trial under Evidence Code section 352.2 and the Racial Justice Act, and denied their request for RJA discovery, ruling that appellants failed to establish prima facie violations and that section 352.2 did not apply retroactively.

The key question(s) on Appeal: 1. Whether the trial court properly denied new trial motions under Evidence Code section 352.2 2. Whether appellants established a prima facie RJA violation regarding admission of the rap song 3. Whether the trial court improperly denied RJA discovery requests

The Appellate Court held that while Evidence Code section 352.2 does not apply retroactively and the rap song evidence was properly admitted, appellants established a prima facie RJA violation because the trial court improperly made credibility determinations and conducted prejudice analysis at the prima facie stage, and the court abused discretion in denying RJA discovery by applying incorrect legal standards requiring case-specific facts and premature application of discovery constraints.

The case is inapplicable when defendants cannot present factual allegations that, if true, would demonstrate substantial likelihood of RJA violations, when creative expressions are offered for legitimate non-propensity purposes without racially charged elements, or when discovery requests lack any statistical or factual foundation suggesting racial bias.

The case leaves open the ultimate merits of appellants' RJA claims on remand, whether discovery should be granted under proper legal standards, the scope of what constitutes "racially discriminatory language" under the RJA, and the precise boundaries of the RJA's exception for relating relevant third-party statements.