California Codes

Cal. Penal Code § 4801 (2026)

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section CA-LEGleginfo.legislature.ca.gov JustiaCode on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

(a)The Board of Parole Hearings may report to the Governor, from time to time, the names of any and all persons imprisoned in any state prison who, in its judgment, ought to have a commutation of sentence or be pardoned and set at liberty on account of good conduct, or unusual term of sentence, or any other cause, including evidence of intimate partner battering and its effects. For purposes of this section, “intimate partner battering and its effects” may include evidence of the nature and effects of physical, emotional, or mental abuse upon the beliefs, perceptions, or behavior of victims of domestic violence if it appears the criminal behavior was the result of that victimization.

(b)(1)The board, in reviewing a prisoner’s suitability for parole pursuant to Section 3041.5, shall give great weight to any information or evidence that, at the time of the commission of the crime, the prisoner had experienced intimate partner battering, but was convicted of an offense that occurred prior to August 29, 1996. The board shall state on the record the information or evidence that it considered pursuant to this subdivision, and the reasons for the parole decision. The board shall annually report to the Legislature and the Governor on the cases the board considered pursuant to this subdivision during the previous year, including the board’s decisions and the specific and detailed findings of its investigations of these cases.

(2)The report for the Legislature to be submitted pursuant to paragraph (1) shall be submitted pursuant to Section 9795 of the Government Code.

(3)The fact that a prisoner has presented evidence of intimate partner battering cannot be used to support a finding that the prisoner lacks insight into his or her crime and its causes.

(c)When a prisoner committed his or her controlling offense, as defined in subdivision (a) of Section 3051, when he or she was 25 years of age or younger, the board, in reviewing a prisoner’s suitability for parole pursuant to Section 3041.5, shall give great weight to the diminished culpability of youth as compared to adults, the hallmark features of youth, and any subsequent growth and increased maturity of the prisoner in accordance with relevant case law.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 35 cases (16 in the last 5 years), 1984–2026 · leading case: In re Poole, 234 Cal. Rptr. 3d 754 (Cal. Ct. App. 5th 2018).
In re Poole, 234 Cal. Rptr. 3d 754 (Cal. Ct. App. 5th 2018). · cites it 3× “" ( Pen. Code, § 4801, subd. (c).) The commissioners rejected petitioner's attempts to explain his perceived need to prove himself and lack of regard for the value of life or consequences of his actions, seeking logical, rational reasons for petitioner's conduct that failed to…”
Julio Bonilla v. Iowa Bd. of Parole, 930 N.W.2d 751 (Iowa 2019). “Cal. Penal Code § 4801 (c) (West, Westlaw through ch.”
People v. Zimmerman, 680 P.2d 776 (Cal. 1984). · cites it 2× “" (Pen. Code, § 4801; see also Cal. Admin. Code, tit.”
State v. Jensen, 2017 SD 18 (S.D. 2017). “§ 54—125a(f)(4); Cal. Penal Code § 4801 (c); W. Va. Code § 62-12 -13b(a), (b).”
Angelo Atwell v. State of Florida, 197 So. 3d 1040 (Fla. 2016). · cites it 4× “See Cal. Penal Code § 4801 (c) (2013). 6. See W.”
In re Palmer, 221 Cal. Rptr. 3d 154 (Cal. Ct. App. 5th 2017). · cites it 3× “" ( Pen. Code, § 4801, subd. (c).) The bill was enacted out of recognition that "youthfulness both lessens a juvenile's moral culpability and enhances the prospect that, as a youth matures into an adult and neurological development occurs, these individuals can become…”
Wilson v. United States Dist. Court for the N. Dist. of California, 161 F.3d 1185 (9th Cir. 1998). “The best he can do is argue that, somehow, he was impeded in his ability to argue his innocence to the Governor.”
(HC) Ortega Morales III v. McVay (E.D. Cal. 2024). · cites it 4× “) Petitioner argues that had he gone to trial, it is reasonably 14 likely that a jury would have acquitted petitioner of murder and found him guilty of 15 manslaughter.”
(HC) Morales v. McVay (E.D. Cal. 2025). · cites it 4× “) Petitioner argues that had he 14 gone to trial, it is reasonably likely that a jury would have acquitted petitioner of murder and 15 found him guilty of manslaughter.”
In re Palmer (Cal. Ct. App. 2017). · cites it 3× “‖ (Pen. Code, § 4801, subd. (c).) The bill was enacted out of recognition that ―youthfulness both lessens a juvenile‘s moral culpability and enhances the prospect that, as a youth matures into an adult and neurological development occurs, these individuals can become…”
In re Poole (Cal. Ct. App. 2018). · cites it 3× “” (Pen. Code, § 4801, subd. (c).) The commissioners rejected petitioner’s 6 As of January 2018, Penal Code sections 4801, subdivision (c), and 3051 apply to offenders whose crimes were committed when they were under 25 years of age.”
Cnty. of San Diego v. Com. on State Mandates (Cal. Ct. App. 2023). · cites it 3× “) In addition to enacting Penal Code section 3051, the bill amended Penal Code section 4801. (Stats. 2013, ch.”
— Cal. Penal Code § 4801(c) — 3 cases
Angelo Atwell v. State of Florida, 197 So. 3d 1040 (Fla. 2016). “See Cal. Penal Code § 4801 (c) (2013). 6. See W.”
(HC) Knight v. Spearman (E.D. Cal. 2020).
(HC) Knight v. Spearman (E.D. Cal. 2021).
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.