Section 1473.5 Of Chapter 1. Of The Writ Of Habeas Corpus From California Penal Code >> Title 12. >> Part 2. >> Chapter 1.
1473.5
. (a) A writ of habeas corpus also may be prosecuted on the
basis that competent and substantial expert testimony relating to
intimate partner battering and its effects, within the meaning of
Section 1107 of the Evidence Code, was not presented to the trier of
fact at the trial court proceedings and is of such substance that,
had the competent and substantial expert testimony been presented,
there is a reasonable probability, sufficient to undermine confidence
in the judgment of conviction or sentence, that the result of the
proceedings would have been different. Sections 1260 to 1262,
inclusive, apply to the prosecution of a writ of habeas corpus
pursuant to this section. As used in this section, "trial court
proceedings" means those court proceedings that occur from the time
the accusatory pleading is filed until and including judgment and
sentence.
(b) This section is limited to violent felonies as specified in
subdivision (c) of Section 667.5 that were committed before August
29, 1996, and that resulted in judgments of conviction or sentence
after a plea or trial as to which expert testimony admissible
pursuant to Section 1107 of the Evidence Code may be probative on the
issue of culpability.
(c) A showing that expert testimony relating to intimate partner
battering and its effects was presented to the trier of fact is not a
bar to granting a petition under this section if that expert
testimony was not competent or substantial. The burden of proof is on
the petitioner to establish a sufficient showing that competent and
substantial expert testimony, of a nature which would be competent
using prevailing understanding of intimate partner battering and its
effects, was not presented to the trier of fact, and had that
evidence been presented, there is a reasonable probability that the
result of the proceedings would have been different.
(d) If a petitioner for habeas corpus under this section has
previously filed a petition for writ of habeas corpus, it is grounds
for denial of the new petition if a court determined on the merits in
the prior petition that the omission of expert testimony relating to
battered women's syndrome or intimate partner battering and its
effects at trial was not prejudicial and did not entitle the
petitioner to the writ of habeas corpus.
(e) For purposes of this section, the changes that become
effective on January 1, 2005, are not intended to expand the uses or
applicability of expert testimony on battering and its effects that
were in effect immediately prior to that date in criminal cases.