Everyday Injustice Podcast Episode 26 – 1437 Constitutionality and the Davidson Case

Share:

The Harvest Cycle Davidson v. El Dorado County case features two separate questions: the constitutionality of SB 1437 and whether Mr. Davidson was a major participant in a 2016 robbery and thus acted in reckless indifference to human life.

The Attorney General’s Office takes the position that SB 1437 is constitutional but that SB 1437 does not apply in this case because Mr. Davidson played a key role in the underlying robbery.

Meanwhile, the El Dorado County DA disagrees and argues that SB 1437 is unconstitutional.

On our podcast is Jennifer Mouzis, the attorney for Mr. Davidson who lays out the importance of SB 1437, why it is constitutional, and explains why her client, Mr. Davidson, had actually nothing to do with this crime.


Enter the maximum amount you want to pay each month
$USD
Sign up for

Share:

About The Author

David Greenwald is the founder, editor, and executive director of the Davis Vanguard. He founded the Vanguard in 2006. David Greenwald moved to Davis in 1996 to attend Graduate School at UC Davis in Political Science. He lives in South Davis with his wife Cecilia Escamilla Greenwald and three children.

Related posts

One thought on “Everyday Injustice Podcast Episode 26 – 1437 Constitutionality and the Davidson Case”

  1. JP Pruitt

    Crazy how Fourth District Court of Appeals rules that sb 1437 is constitutional but a rogue DA in El Dorado can say it isn’t. When these “prosecutors” fail to follow “law” they should be disbarred. Oh… and charged with contempt!

Leave a Reply

X Close

Newsletter Sign-Up

X Close

Monthly Subscriber Sign-Up

Enter the maximum amount you want to pay each month
$ USD
Sign up for