Tennison

Tennison v. California Victim Compensation & Government Claims Board

Good Law
152 Cal. App. 4th 1164·2007 Cal. App. LEXIS 1097·62 Cal. Rptr. 3d 88
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJune 28, 2007A112313California11,412 words

Opinion

Opinion

Parrilli, J.

In this case we hold that a finding of factual innocence under Penal Code section 851.8 does not have collateral estoppel effect in later proceedings before the California Victim Compensation and Government Claims Board (the Board) pursuant to Penal Code section 4900 et seq. under the circumstances presented here. Appellant, John J. Tennison, petitioned the superior court for a writ of mandate after the Board denied him compensation benefits. The superior court denied the requested relief, and we affirm that judgment.

FACTUAL OUTLINE & PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

I State Court Proceedings

In December 1989, Tennison, then 17 years old, was arrested for the murder of Roderick Shannon (also known as “Cooley”) on August 19, 1989. Shannon was beaten by a group of young men, then shot to death with a 12-gauge shotgun in the parking lot of the Super Fair Market, located on the comer of Leland and Rutland Streets in San Francisco. After a car chase, which ended when Shannon crashed his vehicle, Shannon fled on foot, but his pursuers chased and cornered him at the Super Fair Market. The murder occurred against a backdrop of ongoing violent confrontations between youths from the San…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.