California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from People v. Elder, A138214 (Cal. App. 2014):
The rule of lenity Elder seeks to rely upon applies when "two reasonable interpretations of the same provision stand in relative equipoise, i.e., that resolution of the statute's ambiguities in a convincing manner is impracticable." (People v. Avery (2002) 27 Cal.4th 49, 58; People v. Scott, supra, 58 Cal.4th at p. 1426.) We do not find the interpretation Elder urges to be a reasonable one. The plain meaning of the Act is that an inmate must meet the requirements of all subdivisions of section 1170.126(e) in order to qualify for resentencing. Elder does not.
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.