Uncategorized

Judge Goodman Denies Prison Release for Richard Johnson

Published

12 years ago

December 1, 2014

Special to the Post

Richard Johnson, who is currently serving a 25-years-to-life sentence for a third, non-violent felony conviction, is qualified for resentencing and release under the Three Strikes Reform Act of 2012.

The 2012 Act amended the law to impose life sentences only for violent crimes, and to impose lesser punishments for those who have previously been convicted of serious crimes but currently face less serious third felony convictions. This means that those convicted of a third felony, which does not involve violence, will no longer be given life sentences.

Under the 2012 Act, prisoners such as Johnson may petition the court to have their life sentences modified. In ruling upon his petition, the court conducted a “dangerousness hearing” to assess the threat that Johnson might pose if released.

On September 4, Alameda County Judge Larry Goodman denied Johnson’s petition, ruling that resentencing would “pose an unreasonable risk of danger to public safety.” His findings appear to be based entirely on insubstantial evidence and unjustified opinion.

Much of the basis for the denial of Johnson’s petition focused on his criminal history. Johnson has a criminal history and has been in prison for a long time. The facts of this history before his most recent (1997) sentencing are irrelevant when considering the threat that he might pose to society today, if released.

If the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (CDCR) intends to be at all effective in its work, it should be correcting and rehabilitating people who have been convicted of crimes.

Does the Superior Court have such little faith in the ability of the CDCR to perform this intended function that it assumes that a prisoner is as dangerous after 19 years of “correction and rehabilitation” as he was before?

If so, that’s another issue.

Johnson has spent a majority of his lifetime in the prison system and the past 19 years in solitary confinement (SHU), and doesn’t have a single violation on file since 2001 (a harmless mail violation). This means Johnson has spent 13 years acting as a “model prisoner.”

A CDCR success? According to Judge Goodman, Johnson has been in the system so long that he has learned how to manipulate the system. Johnson supposedly knows how to trick the prison guards, the court, and even the court-ordered psychologist.

When Dr. Daisy Switzer conducted a Psychological Risk Assessment, she concluded that Johnson does not pose a threat. Instead of accepting this opinion, Judge Goodman shut it down and even questioned the qualifications of Dr. Switzer, whom he had appointed, seemingly because her findings did not support what he had already concluded.

Other evidence being used against Johnson was his alleged involvement with the Black Guerilla Family (BGF), a political community of black prisoners that has been labeled a “gang.”

The majority of the information regarding the BGF that affected the court’s opinion was presented by a so-called “expert” on black prison gangs, a white police officer who appeared to have never had significant interactions with any so-called “prison gang members.” Even with his interest in framing BGF members in a bad light, this officer was entirely unable to come up with any instances of violence, or even threats of violence, related to the BGF since the 1980s.

Nonetheless, the BGF was considered by the Court to be a “threat to institutional security.” In addition to a lack of evidence in the hearing indicating that the BGF poses a real threat within the prison system, there was no discussion as to how Johnson’s involvement with the BGF would pose a threat outside of the system if he were to be released.

Without this discussion, the use of Johnson’s involvement with the BGF as an indication that he is “dangerous” is not supported by any real evidence and only serves as another example of Judge Goodman’s marked bias.

Goodman goes on to declare that Johnson, who is now in his 60s, has not taken advantage of programming opportunities that would prepare him to be self-sufficient after release. He notes, however, that “the court is aware SHU inmates are not afforded the opportunity for programming as are inmates in the general population,” thus limiting any possibility of Johnson’s involvement in such programming.

Goodman contends that Johnson should have engaged in “self-programming,” though he offers no indication as to what this might be. Goodman cites Johnson’s “lack of marketable skills” as proof that Johnson continues to pose “unreasonable risk of danger to public safety.”

If “marketable skills” are such an important factor in reducing risk, why are SHU inmates not afforded this opportunity?

Furthermore, Johnson is a writer; he writes political essays and poetry and has been offered a job working for Paul Cobb at the Post News Group if and when he is released. Is writing no longer considered a marketable skill, even though it has already secured Johnson a job?

In addition to having a job lined up, Johnson’s sister Yvonne has said that she would invite him to live with her and that payment would not be necessary. Goodman shuts this down as a weak plan, as well.

It is unclear what Goodman would consider to be a valid plan for life after prison, but it is clear that any plan presented by Johnson or his supporters has little to no chance of fitting into that vision.

Goodman’s conclusion is that “there is nothing in Johnson’s court file or prison records, Johnson’s activity while in prison, or in the testimony presented at the ‘dangerousness hearing’ to indicate that Johnson would not return to his life of crime.”

What information could possibly be presented in Johnson’s court file or prison records that would serve as evidence to the contrary? Given that Johnson’s good behavior in SHU these past two decades has elicited no acknowledgement – nor is such acknowledgement common practice at Pelican Bay State Prison – this seems like an absurd assertion.

Further, under the 2012 law the burden is on the District Attorney to prove that Johnson’s release would pose a danger to the community rather than on Johnson to prove that his release would not.

Judge Goodman stated that he does not believe in the Three Strikes Reform Act. Goodman’s resolve to keep Johnson in prison is a blatant disregard for the law and a human rights violation.

Oakland Post

Posts by Oakland Post

Up Next

Landry’s Buzzer Beater Lifts Kings Over Pacers

Don't Miss

School Buzz: A Societal Change

Oakland Post

Click to comment

Uncategorized

Not Just a Southern Issue: Advocates Say SCOTUS Voting Rights Decision Has Already Started to Reshape Black Political Power

OAKLAND POST — Following the Civil War and Reconstruction, constitutional amendments expanded Black citizenship and voting rights across the South, leading to dramatic increases in Black political representation. But those gains were quickly met with violent backlash and the rise of Jim Crow laws designed to suppress Black voting through poll taxes, literacy tests, and other “race-neutral” restrictions.

Published

3 weeks ago

June 17, 2026

bpusa-syndication

By Edward Henderson, California Black Media

U.S. Rep. Sydney Kamlager-Dove (D-CA-37), a member of the Congressional Black Caucus (CBC) whose district spans parts of Los Angeles County, joined fellow CBC member U.S. Rep. Troy Carter (D-LA-2) for a May 21 briefing with Black media outlets in California.

The lawmakers highlighted what they describe as a mounting threat to Black political representation resulting from an April 29 U.S. Supreme Court ruling that weakened key protections under the federal Voting Rights Act.

Kamlager-Dove and Carter warned that the decision, which narrowed the role of race in redistricting, is already reshaping congressional districts across the South and undermining Black voters’ ability to elect candidates of their choice.

“While we are a super blue state, we have far to go when it comes to Black representation; we tend to take that for granted,” Kamlager-Dove said of California, noting that the Golden State has the fifth largest Black population in the country and only has three Black members of Congress.

“While I support building coalitions, we have to make sure that as a Black community we are not yielding our power,” she added.

Calling the fight “not unique to the South,” Carter urged Black communities nationwide to recognize the broader implications of the legal and political battles unfolding in Southern legislatures and courtrooms.

The Supreme Court ruling centers on Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965, the portion of the law that prohibits voting systems or district maps that dilute the voting strength of racial minorities. For decades, Section 2 allowed civil rights groups to challenge district maps that weakened Black political representation even when lawmakers did not openly state discriminatory intent.

Now, advocates fear that standard has fundamentally changed.

“You have to have smoking gun evidence,” said Mitchell Brown, senior voting rights counsel at the Southern Coalition for Social Justice, during a recent media briefing hosted by American Community Media on May 15. “Legislators are not going to say the quiet part out loud.”

The implications could stretch far beyond congressional elections, Brown said.

Section 2 protections have historically applied not only to U.S. House districts, but also to state legislatures, school boards, county commissions, judgeships, and local governing bodies. Voting rights advocates warn that weakening those protections could reshape political representation throughout the South, particularly in states with large Black populations.

“This is not just a Southern issue,” said Amir Badat, manager of Black Voters on the Rise and voting special counsel at the NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund.

Badat described the current moment as part of a much longer historical pattern.

Following the Civil War and Reconstruction, constitutional amendments expanded Black citizenship and voting rights across the South, leading to dramatic increases in Black political representation. But those gains were quickly met with violent backlash and the rise of Jim Crow laws designed to suppress Black voting through poll taxes, literacy tests, and other “race-neutral” restrictions.

“This is the same move,” Badat said.

Advocates also emphasized that the consequences of weakened voting protections extend into everyday life.

Local elected offices such as school boards, city councils, county commissions, and judgeships often determine funding priorities, public safety policy, education standards, and infrastructure investments.

“These are not abstract numbers,” Badat said. “These have real political consequences and policy consequences on people’s day-to-day lives.”

bpusa-syndication

Posts by bpusa-syndication

Uncategorized

Rest in Peace: A.M.E. Pastor and L.A Civil Rights Icon Cecil “Chip” Murray Passes

The Rev. Dr. Cecil L. “Chip” Murray, former pastor of First African Methodist Episcopal Church (FAME) in Los Angeles, died of natural causes April 6 at his Windsor Hills Home. He was 94. “Today, we lost a giant. Reverend Dr. Cecil Murray dedicated his life to service, community, and putting God first in all things. I had the absolute honor of working with him, worshiping with him, and seeking his counsel,” said Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass of the dynamic religious leader whose ministry inspired and attracted millionaires as well as former gang bangers and people dealing with substance use disorder (SUD).

Published

5 months ago

February 3, 2026

Oakland Post

The Rev. Dr. Cecil L. “Chip” Murray, former pastor of First African Methodist Episcopal Church (FAME) in Los Angeles, died of natural causes April 6 at his Windsor Hills Home. He was 94.

“Today, we lost a giant. Reverend Dr. Cecil Murray dedicated his life to service, community, and putting God first in all things. I had the absolute honor of working with him, worshiping with him, and seeking his counsel,” said Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass of the dynamic religious leader whose ministry inspired and attracted millionaires as well as former gang bangers and people dealing with substance use disorder (SUD).

Murray oversaw the growth of FAME’s congregation from 250 members to 18,000.

“My heart is with the First AME congregation and community today as we reflect on a legacy that changed this city forever,” Bass continued.

Murray served as Senior Minister at FAME, the oldest Black congregation in the city, for 27 years. During that time, various dignitaries visited and he built strong relationships with political and civic leaders in the city and across the state, as well as a number of Hollywood figures. Several national political leaders also visited with Murray and his congregation at FAME, including Presidents George W. Bush and Bill Clinton.

Murray, a Florida native and U.S. Air Force vet, attended Florida A&M University, where he majored in history, worked on the school newspaper and pledged Alpha Phi Alpha Fraternity. He later attended Claremont School of Theology in Los Angeles County, where he earned his doctorate in Divinity.

Murray is survived by his son Drew. His wife Bernadine, who was a committed member of the A.M.E. church and the daughter of his childhood pastor, died in 2013.

Oakland Post

Posts by Oakland Post

Uncategorized

Court Throws Out Law That Allowed Californians to Build Duplexes, Triplexes and RDUs on Their Properties

Charter cities in California won a lawsuit last week against the state that declared Senate Bill (SB) 9, a pro-housing bill, unconstitutional. Passed in 2021, SB 9 is also known as the California Housing Opportunity and More Efficiency Act (HOME). That law permits up to four residential units — counting individual units of duplexes, triplexes and residential dwelling units (RDUs) – to be built on properties in neighborhoods that were previously zoned for only single-family homes.

Published

5 months ago

February 3, 2026

Oakland Post

Charter cities in California won a lawsuit last week against the state that declared Senate Bill (SB) 9, a pro-housing bill, unconstitutional.

Passed in 2021, SB 9 is also known as the California Housing Opportunity and More Efficiency Act (HOME). That law permits up to four residential units — counting individual units of duplexes, triplexes and residential dwelling units (RDUs) – to be built on properties in neighborhoods that were previously zoned for only single-family homes.

A Los Angeles Superior Court Judge ruled in favor of the cities, pointing out that SB 9 discredited charter cities that were granted jurisdiction to create new governance systems and enact policy reforms. The court ruling affects 121 charter cities that have local constitutions.

Attorney Pam Lee represented five Southern California cities in the lawsuit against the state and Attorney General Rob Bonta.

“This is a monumental victory for all charter cities in California,” Lee said.

However, general law cities are excluded from the court ruling as state housing laws still apply in residential areas.

Attorney General Bonta and his team are working to review the decision and consider all options that will protect SB 9 as a state law. Bonta said the law has helped provide affordable housing for residents in California.

“Our statewide housing shortage and affordability crisis requires collaboration, innovation, and a good faith effort by local governments to increase the housing supply,” Bonta said.

“SB9 is an important tool in this effort, and we’re going to make sure homeowners have the opportunity to utilize it,” he said.

Charter cities remain adamant that the state should refrain from making land-use decisions on their behalf. In the lawsuit, city representatives argued that SB 9 eliminates local authority to create single-family zoning districts and approve housing developments.