Two Judges Hearing Case In Appellate Division Of Superior Court Were Not Enough.

A man convicted of a misdemeanor appealed to the appellate division of the superior court, which affirmed his conviction. When the appellate division heard his appeal, however, there were only two judges. When the man complained, the appellate division held that two judges are sufficient. The man petitioned the Court of Appeal for extraordinary relief.  Code of Civil Procedure, section 77, subdivision (b), states: “In each appellate division, no more than three judges shall participate in a hearing or decision. The presiding judge of the division shall designate the three judges who shall participate.” Subdivision (d) adds that “[t]he concurrence of two judges of the appellate division of the superior court shall be necessary to render the decision in every case. . . .”  After the appellate court issued an order to show cause, the superior court discontinued its policy of having two-judge panels. The appellate court found there should have been three judges and issued a peremptory writ of mandate directing the appellate division to vacate its order denying the man’s petition for rehearing and grant it. (Johnson v. App. Div. of the Sup. Ct. of Santa Cruz Co. (The People) October 17, 2014) 230 Cal.App.4th 825, 179 Cal.Rptr.3d 90].)