Department of the Treasury Internal Revenue Service
Public Charity Status and Public Support
Complete if the organization is a section 501(c)(3) organization or a section
4947(a)(1) nonexempt charitable trust.
Attach to Form 990 or Form 990-EZ. See separate instructions.
OMB No. 1545-0047
2010
Open to Public Inspection
Name of the organization
Criminal Justice Legal Foundation
Employer identification number
94-2798865
Part I
Reason for Public Charity Status
(All organizations must complete this part.) See instructions
The organization is not a private foundation because it is: (For lines 1 through 11, check only one box.)
1
2
3
4
5
section 170(b)(1)(A)(iv). (Complete Part II.)
6
7
8
9
receipts from activities related to its exempt functions—subject to certain exceptions, and (2) no more than 331/3% of
its support from gross investment income and unrelated business taxable income (less section 511 tax) from businesses
acquired by the organization after June 30, 1975. See section 509(a)(2). (Complete Part III.)
10
11
e
By checking this box, I certify that the organization is not controlled directly or indirectly by one or more disqualified persons other than foundation managers and other than one or more publicly supported organizations described in section 509(a)(1) or section 509(a)(2).
f
If the organization received a written determination from the IRS that it is a Type I, Type II or Type III supporting organization, check this box
..................................................
g
Since August 17, 2006, has the organization accepted any gift or contribution from any of the following persons?
(i) a person who directly or indirectly controls, either alone or together with persons described in (ii)
Yes
No
and (iii) below, the governing body of the the supported organization?
................
11g(i)
(ii)
a family member of a person described in (i) above?
......................
11g(ii)
(iii)
a 35% controlled entity of a person described in (i) or (ii) above?
................
11g(iii)
h
Provide the following information about the supported organization(s).
(i) Name of supported organization
(ii) EIN
(iii) Type of organization (described on lines 1- 9 above or IRC section (see instructions))
(iv) Is the organization in col. (i) listed in your governing document?
(v) Did you notify the organization in col. (i) of your support?
(vi) Is the organization in col. (i) organized in the U.S.?
(vii) Amount of support?
Yes
No
Yes
No
Yes
No
Total
For Paperwork Reduction Act Notice, see the Instructions for Form 990.
Cat. No. 11285F
Schedule A (Form 990 or 990-EZ) 2010
Schedule A (Form 990 or 990-EZ) 2010
Page 2
Part II
Support Schedule for Organizations Described in IRC 170(b)(1)(A)(iv) and 170(b)(1)(A)(vi) (Complete only if you checked the box on line 5, 7, or 8 of Part I or if the
organization failed to qualify under Part III. If the organization fails to
qualify under the tests listed below, please complete Part III.)
Section A. Public Support
Calendar year(or fiscal year beginning in)
(a) 2006
(b) 2007
(c) 2008
(d) 2009
(e) 2010
(f) Total
1
Gifts, grants, contributions, and membership fees received. (Do not include any "unusual grants.") ....
539,199
495,386
523,881
536,338
679,516
2,774,320
2
Tax revenues levied for the organization's benefit and either paid to or expended on its behalf.......
0
3
The value of services or facilities furnished by a governmental unit to the organization without charge..
0
4
Total. Add lines 1 through 3..
539,199
495,386
523,881
536,338
679,516
2,774,320
5
The portion of total contributions by each person (other than a governmental unit or publicly supported organization) included
on line 1 that exceeds 2% of the amount shown on line 11, column (f)..
910,023
6
Public Support. Subtract line 5 from line 4.
1,864,297
Section B. Total Support
Calendar year(or fiscal year beginning in)
(a) 2006
(b) 2007
(c) 2008
(d) 2009
(e) 2010
(f) Total
7
Amounts from line 4..
539,199
495,386
523,881
536,338
679,516
2,774,320
8
Gross income from interest, dividends, payments received on securities loans, rents, royalties and income from similar sources..
19,135
19,342
12,778
11,441
12,421
75,117
9
Net income from unrelated business activities, whether or not the business is regularly carried on..
0
10
Other income. (Explain in Part IV.) Do not include gain or loss from the sale of capital assets..
0
11
Total support (Add lines 7 through 10).
2,849,437
12
Gross receipts from related activities, etc. (See instructions.)
..................
12
13
First Five Years
If the Form 990 is for the organization's first, second, third, fourth, or fifth tax year as a 501(c)(3) organization,
check this box and stop here..........................................
Section C. Computation of Public Support Percentage
14
Public Support Percentage for 2010 (line 6 column (f) divided by line 11 column (f))
.........
14
65.430 %
15
Public Support Percentage for 2009 Schedule A, Part II, line 14
...............
15
67.530 %
16a
33 1/3% support test—2010.
If the organization did not check the box on line 13, and line 14 is 33 1/3% or more, check this box
and stop here. The organization qualifies as a publicly supported organization
......................
b
33 1/3% support test—2009.
If the organization did not check the box on line 13 or 16a, and line 15 is 33 1/3% or more, check this
box and stop here. The organization qualifies as a publicly supported organization
.....................
17a
10%-facts-and-circumstances test—2010.
If the organization did not check a box on line 13, 16a, or 16b and line 14
is 10% or more, and if the organization meets the "facts and circumstances" test, check this box and stop here. Explain
in Part IV how the organization meets the "facts and circumstances" test. The organization qualifies as a publicly supported
organization
..................................................
b
10%-facts-and-circumstances test—2009.
If the organization did not check a box on line 13, 16a, 16b, or 17a and line
15 is 10% or more, and if the organization meets the "facts and circumstances" test, check this box and stop here.
Explain in Part IV how the organization meets the "facts and circumstances" test. The organization qualifies as a publicly supported organization
..............................................
18
Private Foundation
If the organization did not check a box on line 13, 16a, 16b, 17a or 17b, check this box and see
instructions
...................................................
Schedule A (Form 990 or 990-EZ) 2010
Schedule A (Form 990 or 990-EZ) 2010
Page 3
Part III
Support Schedule for Organizations Described in IRC 509(a)(2) (Complete only if you checked the box on line 9 of Part I or if the organization
failed to qualify under Part II. If the organization fails to qualify under
the tests listed below, please complete Part II.)
Section A. Public Support
Calendar year(or fiscal year beginning in)
(a) 2006
(b) 2007
(c) 2008
(d) 2009
(e) 2010
(f) Total
1
Gifts, grants, contributions, and membership fees received. (Do not include any "unusual grants.") .
2
Gross receipts from admissions, merchandise sold or services performed, or facilities furnished in any activity that is related to the organization's tax-exempt purpose......
3
Gross receipts from activities that are not an unrelated trade or business under section 513..
4
Tax revenues levied for the organization's benefit and either paid to or expended on its behalf...
5
The value of services or facilities furnished by a governmental unit to the organization without charge..
6
Total. Add lines 1 through 5.
7a
Amounts included on lines 1, 2, and 3 received from disqualified persons...
b
Amounts included on lines 2 and 3 received from other than disqualified persons that exceed the greater of $5,000 or 1% of the amount on line 13 for the year.
c
Add lines 7a and 7b..
8
Public Support (Subtract line 7c from line 6.)
Section B. Total Support
Calendar year (or fiscal year beginning in)
(a) 2006
(b) 2007
(c) 2008
(d) 2009
(e) 2010
(f) Total
9
Amounts from line 6...
10a
Gross income from interest, dividends, payments received on securities loans, rents, royalties and income from similar sources..
b
Unrelated business taxable income (less section 511 taxes) from businesses acquired after June 30, 1975.
c
Add lines 10a and 10b.
11
Net income from unrelated business activities not included in line 10b, whether or not the business is regularly carried on.
12
Other income. Do not include gain or loss from the sale of capital assets (Explain in Part IV.)
13
Total support (Add lines 9, 10c, 11 and 12.).
14
First Five Years
If the Form 990 is for the organization's first, second, third, fourth, or fifth tax year as a 501(c)(3) organization,
check this box and stop here.............................................
Section C. Computation of Public Support Percentage
15
Public Support Percentage for 2010 (line 8 column (f) divided by line 13 column (f))
.........
15
16
Public support percentage from 2009 Schedule A, Part III, line 15
...............
16
Section D. Computation of Investment Income Percentage
17
Investment income percentage for 2010 (line 10c column (f) divided by line 13 column (f))
......
17
18
Investment income percentage from 2009 Schedule A, Part III, line 17
.............
18
19a
33 1/3% support tests—2010.
If the organization did not check the box on line 14, and line 15 is more than 33 1/3% and line 17 is not more than 33 1/3%, check this box and stop here. The organization qualifies as a publicly supported organization
..........
b
33 1/3% support tests—2009.
If the organization did not check a box on line 14 or line 19a, and line 16 is more than 33 1/3% and line 18 is not more than 33 1/3%, check this box and stop here. The organization qualifies as a publicly supported organization
....
20
Private Foundation
If the organization did not check a box on line 14, 19a or 19b, check this box and see instructions
.....
Schedule A (Form 990 or 990-EZ) 2010
Schedule A (Form 990 or 990-EZ) 2010
Page 4
Part IV
Supplemental Information.
Supplemental Information. Complete this part to provide the explanation required by Part II, line 10; Part II, line 17a or 17b; or Part III, line 12. Also complete this part for any additional information. (See instructions).
Facts And Circumstances Test
Explanation
Schedule A (Form 990 or 990-EZ) 2010
Additional Data
Software ID:
10000105
Software Version:
2010v3.2
-
TIN:
SCHEDULE O (Form 990 or 990-EZ)
Department of the Treasury Internal Revenue Service
Supplemental Information to Form 990 or 990-EZ
Complete to provide information for responses to specific questions on
Form 990 or to provide any additional information.
Attach to Form 990 or 990-EZ.
OMB No. 1545-0047
2010
Open to Public Inspection
Name of the organization
Criminal Justice Legal Foundation
Employer identification number
94-2798865
Identifier
Return Reference
Explanation
Form 990, Part VI, Line 19
Form 990, Part VI, Line 19: Other Organization Documents Publicly Available
Governing documents, policies and financial statements may be viewed upon request at the Foundation's office located at 2131 L Street, Sacramento, California.
Form 990, Part VI, Line 15b
Form 990, Part VI, Line 15b: Compensation Review and Approval Process for Officers and Key Employees
At least annually, the Board reviews salaries and benefits paid to all employees (including officers and key employees), and votes on bonuses or salary increases accordingly.
Form 990, Part VI, Line 12c
Form 990, Part VI, Line 12c: Explanation of Monitoring and Enforcement of Conflicts
This organization has few outside contractors therefore, they are able to review all new contracts as they may enter into it, to be assured it is not with an entity that any of their Board or employees have an interest in.
Form 990, Part VI, Line 11
Form 990, Part VI, Line 11: Form 990 Review Process
Director reviews 990 prior to filing
Client Note 1 - Public interest law firm: Attachment of legal cases participated inDavis v. United States: WIN 6/16/11. U. S. Supreme Court decision rejecting a criminal's claim that his conviction as an ex-felon in possession of a firearm was invalid because the police search that uncovered his gun violated the Exclusionary Rule. The gun was found in Willie Gene Davis's jacket pocket during a search after a traffic stop. Davis had left his jacket in the car when police asked him to step out. While the search was legal at the time, during Davis's appeal a new Supreme Court decision changed search rules to prohibit searching belongings left in a vehicle during a traffic stop. After the appeals court upheld Davis's conviction because the police had followed the law at the time of the search, the Supreme Court agreed to hear his appeal. CJLF joined the case to encourage a decision finding that searches such as this one should fall under the "good faith" exception established by United States v. Leon, a high court decision CJLF helped win in 1984. The Court's holding adopted that reasoning.Brown v. Plata: LOSS 5/23/11. U. S. Supreme Court ruling upholding the January 2010 order by a panel of three federal judges that requires California to lower its prison population by 27% (currently 33,500 inmates), within two years to remedy overcrowding, which was determined to violate inmates' constitutional rights. CJLF had joined the case to argue that the release order was invalid because the selection of three notorious pro-defendant judges as panel members by the Chief Judge of the Ninth Circuit guaranteed the result, and that once on the panel, the judges manipulated the process to prevent any objective review of the inmates' claims.Cullen v. Pinholster: WIN 4/4/11. U. S. Supreme Court decision utilizing CJLF arguments to reinstate the death sentence of a habitual criminal who killed a man during a home burglary in Los Angeles. In 1984, Scott Pinholster was convicted on strong evidence, including his own incriminating statements, and sentenced to death. Over the next 25 years, six courts reviewed his claim that his defense attorney had failed to adequately present evidence of his mental health problems. In 2009, after a three judge panel of the Ninth Circuit reviewing the case on habeas corpus rejected the claim, a larger en banc panel accepted it and overturned Pinholster's death sentence. The en banc panel, after reviewing a third psychiatric evaluation not presented in state court, ruled that the California Supreme Court's denial of Pinholster's claim was unreasonable. CJLF joined the high court appeal of that ruling to argue that the Ninth Circuit violated federal law, which prohibits federal courts reviewing a state court decision on habeas corpus from considering evidence never presented to the state court. The court's decision adopted that reasoning.Tolentino v. New York: DRAW 3/29/11. U. S. Supreme Court announcement that it would not reconsider a New York Court of Appeals decision which denied a defendant's claim that police access to his criminal record during a traffic stop amounted to an illegal search. Last fall, the high court announced it would hear Jose Tolentino's claim that because police illegally stopped his car for excessive noise in 2005, they could not introduce his record, which indicated that he was driving on a suspended license and had at least 10 prior suspensions. While the legality of the traffic stop was never determined, the New York court held that the government's own records do not fall under the protection of the Exclusionary Rule and cannot be excluded from trial. Before the Supreme Court, CJLF argued that the rules governing traffic stops do not prevent police from learning a driver's identity and checking his or her criminal record. After reviewing briefs and hearing oral argument, the Court determined that it would not disturb the lower court's holding.Walker v. Martin: WIN 2/23/11. Unanimous U. S. Supreme Court decision utilizing CJLF arguments to reverse a 2009 Ninth Circuit ruling that had found California's deadline for filing state habeas corpus petitions inadequate. Charles Martin was convicted on strong evidence and sentenced to life in prison for the 1986 stabbing murder of a Sacramento man. After years of successive attempts to overturn his conviction, Martin's final petition raising new claims was dismissed by both state and federal courts for violating a state rule which requires claims to be filed in a timely manner. In 2009, the Ninth Circuit overturned the lower courts' decisions and granted additional review of Martin's claims. CJLF joined the appeal of that ruling to argue that federal courts should not be allowed to ignore state procedural rules, so long as the defendant had adequate notice of the rule and a reasonable opportunity to comply with it.Premo v. Moore: WIN 1/19/11. Unanimous U. S. Supreme Court decision reinstating the conviction of an Oregon murderer. The decision utilized CJLF arguments to unanimously overturn a 2009 Ninth Circuit ruling which had announced that the murderer's lawyer was ineffective. Randy Moore admitted to kidnapping a man and then killing him with a gunshot to the temple, but claimed that the single-action revolver went off accidently. His defense attorney negotiated a plea deal which spared Moore from the possibility of a death sentence. Years later, the Ninth Circuit invalidated the conviction, ruling that the defense attorney should have sought to have the confession excluded. CJLF joined the state's appeal to argue that the Ninth Circuit ruling ignored key facts and violated limits on its authority.Harrington v. Richter: WIN 1/19/11. Unanimous U. S. Supreme Court decision utilizing CJLF arguments to reverse a 2009 Ninth Circuit ruling that overturned the robbery/murder conviction of a Sacramento man. After his conviction on strong evidence, Joshua Richter claimed that his attorney had been ineffective. This claim was reviewed and summarily rejected by the California Supreme Court, the Federal District Court, and a three-judge Ninth Circuit panel. An en banc eleven-judge Ninth Circuit panel overturned all three courts, finding California's high court decision unreasonable. In the U. S. Supreme Court, CJLF argued that the California court's judgment was reasonable and entitled to deference. The high court ruling noted this, protecting thousands of convictions nationwide.United States v. Ghailani: WIN 7/13/10. Federal District Court decision rejecting the claim of a suspected terrorist, who President Obama decided to try in civilian court, that his detention by the military as an enemy combatant at Guantanamo Bay violated his constitutional right to a speedy trial. Ghailani, who has since been convicted of the 1998 bombings of two U. S. embassies killing 223 people, was joined by the Center for Constitutional Rights in arguing that because his rights were violated, he must be set free. At the invitation of the District Judge in this case, CJLF introduced argument noting that the suspected terrorist was a military prisoner being held for national security reasons before the government decided to give him a trial in civilian court. He had no speedy trial right during this period. The federal judge agreed.
For Paperwork Reduction Act Notice, see the Instructions for Form 990 or 990-EZ.