Racially Charged Police Remarks Can Open the Door to a New Hearing—and Possibly a Reversed Conviction
When police officers allow racial bias to influence their decisions, the consequences can extend far beyond an unlawful stop or an improper search. Under California’s Racial Justice Act (RJA), racially charged remarks—whether spoken during a traffic stop or written into a police report—can form the basis for meaningful postconviction relief, including a new evidentiary hearing and, in some cases, a reversed conviction.
A recent appellate decision involving Hernandez v. Superior Court (People) highlights just how powerful the RJA can be for accused individuals who believe racial bias played a role in their case.
Our experienced criminal defense attorneys at Wallin & Klarich can guide you through the legal process. Call Wallin & Klarich today toll-free at (877) 466-5245 for your free consultation with one of our criminal defense attorneys near you.
The Case: Racially Charged Statements and Assumptions by Police
In Hernandez, San Jose police officers stopped Gabriel Hernandez for minor fix-it ticket violations. During the stop, officers discovered ammunition in the vehicle, and Hernandez was charged with possession of ammunition by a felon.
What made this case different was not just the charge—but what the officers said and how they acted during the stop.
Relying on body-worn camera footage and police conduct during the encounter, Hernandez later filed a motion under the Racial Justice Act, arguing that the officers’ actions were tainted by racial bias. Among other things, the officers made remarks suggesting that Hernandez was a felon based on appearance and race, including statements like “homie’s a felon fo sholly” and “You got felony convictions, yeah? I’m pretty sure it’s likely.”
The trial court denied Hernandez’s RJA motion, finding that he failed to make a prima facie showing of racial bias and labeling his claims “conclusory” and speculative.
Hernandez appealed—and the Court of Appeal disagreed with the trial court.
The Appellate Court’s Ruling: A Hearing Is Required
The Court of Appeal reversed and remanded, holding that Hernandez was entitled to an evidentiary hearing under the RJA.
The appellate court emphasized a critical point:
At the prima facie stage, trial courts must accept the accused individual’s factual allegations as true, unless those allegations are purely conclusory, unsupported by evidence, or directly contradicted by the record.
Importantly, courts may not isolate each allegation and dismiss them one by one. Instead, they must look at the totality of the facts. When viewed collectively, Hernandez’s allegations—including racially stereotyped language, assumptions about felony status, questionable justifications for a pat search, and gang-related signaling—created a substantial likelihood of racial bias.
That was enough to trigger a mandatory evidentiary hearing under the RJA.
What Is the Racial Justice Act—and Why It Matters
California’s Racial Justice Act (Penal Code section 745) was enacted to address racial bias in the criminal legal system, even when that bias does not rise to the level of intentional discrimination under traditional constitutional standards.
The RJA prohibits the State from obtaining a conviction or sentence based on race, ethnicity, or national origin. A violation can be shown through:
- Racially charged statements by law enforcement, prosecutors, or witnesses
- Implicit or explicit bias influencing decisions to stop, search, charge, or prosecute
- Disparate treatment compared to similarly situated individuals of other races
- Statistical or anecdotal evidence demonstrating racial bias
Crucially, the RJA applies not only at trial—but also after conviction, through motions for new trial, resentencing, or other postconviction relief.
As Hernandez makes clear, a single police report or body-camera recording containing racially charged language may be enough to open the door to further judicial scrutiny.
How Racially Charged Remarks Can Affect a Conviction
When a police officer makes racially biased comments—whether spoken aloud, captured on video, or documented in a report—it raises serious questions about:
- Why the accused individual was stopped
- Whether the search or arrest was pretextual
- Whether assumptions about criminal history were race-based
- Whether evidence was obtained as a result of biased policing
Under the RJA, courts are required to take these concerns seriously. If racial bias is shown to have played any role in obtaining the conviction, the court may order remedies ranging from evidence suppression to vacating the conviction entirely.
How Wallin & Klarich Can Help
Our Wallin & Klarich criminal defense attorneys closely examine police reports, body-camera footage, and officer statements for signs of racial bias. We understand how to identify RJA violations and how to present them effectively—whether at the trial level or through postconviction motions and appeals.
If you believe racially charged remarks, stereotypes, or assumptions influenced your arrest, prosecution, or conviction, you may be entitled to relief under the Racial Justice Act—even if your case is already final.
Call Wallin & Klarich Today
Racial bias has no place in the criminal legal system. If you or a loved one believe race played a role in a conviction, the law may provide a path forward. One of our experienced criminal defense attorneys can help you determine whether the Racial Justice Act applies to your case. Early review of the record can make the difference between a conviction standing—or being sent back for a new hearing that could change everything.
At Wallin & Klarich, we have offices all over Southern California: Irvine, Pasadena, Riverside, San Bernardino, San Diego, Torrance, and Anaheim. Additionally, our law firm can handle many types of cases statewide.
Discover how our team can assist you. Contact us today, toll-free at (877) 466-5245 for a free consultation with a skilled criminal defense attorney near you.
