Surprisingly, the state trial court held that the other judge's finding of Tennison's factual innocence was insufficient to invoke the compensation-for-wrongful¬-incarceration statute and dismissed the case, and the appellate court affirmed.
The Court of Appeals held that Tennison did not carry his burden of “showing (1) he is innocent because he did not in fact commit the crime; and, (2) he did not in any way contribute to his arrest or conviction.” The California Supreme Court denied review. See: 152 Cal.App.4th 1164, 62 Cal.Rptr.3d 88 (Cal.App. 1 Dist., 2007), review denied.
Additional source: Bay City News (San Francisco) June 29, 2007
As a digital subscriber to Prison Legal News, you can access full text and downloads for this and other premium content.
Already a subscriber? Login
Related legal case
Tennison v. California Victim Compensation and Government Claims Board
|Cite||152 Cal.App.4th 1164, (Cal.App. 1 Dist., 2007)|
|Level||State Court of Appeals|