In re Brodheim CA1/4

Good Law
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJune 17, 2015A141314California10,152 words

Opinion

Opinion

I.

INTRODUCTION

Michael Brodheim, a state prison inmate serving a life term for the 1981 murder of Kristin Malmquist, petitions for a writ of habeas corpus seeking to overturn Governor Edmund G. Brown Jr.’s (the Governor) June 7, 2013 reversal of the grant of parole by the Board of Parole Hearings (the Board). This is the second time the Governor has reversed the Board’s grant of parole to petitioner. The Governor denied parole on this occasion, referring to his earlier reversal of the Board’s 2012 grant of parole on the basis of the “heinous nature of the crime and because Mr. Brodheim lacked insight, had a rather selective memory of his actions, and has continued to exhibit many of the same traits that led him to murder. Mr. Brodheim’s statements since then have not changed significantly and my concerns remain.” The Governor found that petitioner currently poses an unreasonable danger to society if released. He based that determination primarily on what he found to be petitioner’s “muddled” explanation of why he had sex with Kristin’s body after she was murdered and his view that petitioner’s unresolved childhood feelings

1 of vulnerability and fears of abandonment did not…

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.