In Re Bettencourt

In Re Betterncourt

Good Law
156 Cal. App. 4th 780·67 Cal. Rptr. 3d 497
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaOctober 19, 2007H030822California9,307 words

Opinion

Opinion

Bamattre-Manoukian, J.

I. INTRODUCTION

Petitioner Daniel Fredrick Bettencourt pleaded guilty to second degree murder (Pen. Code, § 187) in 1981 and is presently serving a sentence of 15 years to life in California State Prison, Solano. After a hearing held on July 24, 2002, the Board of Prison Terms (now the Board of Parole Hearings; hereafter Board) found that Bettencourt was unsuitable for parole because he posed an unreasonable risk of danger to society or a threat to public safety if released from prison.

Bettencourt challenged the Board’s decision to deny parole by filing a petition for writ of habeas corpus in the superior court, which issued an order to show cause requiring the Attorney General to address issues not raised in the habeas corpus petition. The Board petitioned this court for writ relief and we issued a peremptory writ of mandate vacating the order to show cause. (Board of Prison Terms v. Superior Court (2005) 130 Cal.App.4th 1212, 1244 [ 31 Cal.Rptr.3d 70 ].)

After the superior court issued a new order to show cause, Bettencourt filed two supplemental habeas corpus petitions and the superior court issued a second order to show cause. No return to either order to show…

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.