Logourl black
From our private database of 14,000+ case briefs...

Sims v. Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation

California Court of Appeal
157 Cal. Rptr. 3d 409 (2013)


Facts

The California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (CDCR) (defendant) administered a state statute providing for the execution of condemned inmates by lethal injection. The CDCR promulgated standards for lethal injections in a manual known as the San Quentin Operational Procedure Number 0-770 (OP 770). The California Court of Appeals found the CDCR failed to promulgate revisions to OP 770 in accordance with the regulatory approval process required by the Administrative Procedure Act (APA). In response, the CDCR initiated the rulemaking process for OP 770 by submitting draft regulations and a notice of proposed regulatory action to the Office of Administrative Law (OAL). The CDCR also issued an initial statement of reasons (ISOR) explaining the rationale for the proposed regulations. During the notice and comment period, the CDCR received 29,416 comments from the public. Moreover, during a six-hour public hearing, 102 people expressed their opinions. Upon obtaining approval by the OAL, the CDCR implemented the regulations. Mitchell Sims (plaintiff) challenged the regulations, claiming the CDCR failed to substantially comply with the mandatory procedural requirements of the APA. The CDCR failed to comply with a number of procedural requirements, including: the failure to explain its consideration and rejection of alternatives to the proposed regulations, the failure to make the entire rulemaking file available to the public until six weeks after publication of the notice of proposed action, the failure to summarize and provide a response to two dozen written comments, and the inclusion of irrelevant information in the rulemaking file. The trial court found the agency failed to substantially comply with the APA and invalidated the regulations. The CDCR appealed.

Rule of Law

The rule of law is the black letter law upon which the court rested its decision.

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

Issue

The issue section includes the dispositive legal issue in the case phrased as a question.

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

Holding and Reasoning (Kline, J.)

The holding and reasoning section includes:

  • A “yes” or “no” answer to the question framed in the issue section;
  • A summary of the majority or plurality opinion, using the CREAC method; and
  • The procedural disposition (e.g. reversed and remanded, affirmed, etc.).

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 97,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Vanderbilt, Berkeley, and the University of Illinois—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students. Read our student testimonials.

  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students. Read more about Quimbee.

Here's why 177,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 14,000 briefs, keyed to 188 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
  • The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
  • Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
  • Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.