People v. Gonzalez

Mr. Gonzalez aimed a laser pointer at a sheriff's helicopter for which he was arrested and charged by the Los Angeles District Attorney's office with a felony punishable by three years imprisonment.  Gonzalez was also fined two thousand dollars by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA).  When Gonzalez showed up for his preliminary hearing, he entered a plea of "once in jeopardy" and showed the judge a receipt for his payment of the two thousand dollar FAA fine.  The judge found the FAA fine constituted a "criminal penalty", meaning Gonzalez had already been placed in jeopardy, and dismissed the case.  The prosecutor appealed.

Here the Second District reverses, ordering the complaint reinstated.  In the panel's opinion, Gonzalez did not satisfy his evidential burden of demonstrating the FAA fine was a "criminal punishment" for purposes of Article I, section 15, of the California Constitution.

Yesterday, I explained how California's appellate courts use the trope of "overburdened courts" when they are bereft of any legitimate legal basis to deny individuals certain protections against the state's armament.  Notice how, though hanging like ripe fruit (what could be better for California's overburdened superior courts than to relieve them of their burden to conduct a full-blown felony trial over an accusation of pointing a laser pointer at a helicopter and just defer to the FAA, who is much better suited to determine the severity of Gonzalez's actions), the concerns of overburdened courts and lessening said burden doesn't quite make it into this opinion.

That is because courts only consider their duties "burdens" when they benefit the individual.  On remand, I hope Gonzalez's attorneys realize Gonzalez has a right to burden the superior court with a jury trial on his plea of "once in jeopardy".