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
2012
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 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 monetary support
Yes
No
Yes
No
Yes
No
Total
For Paperwork Reduction Act Notice, see the Instructions for Form 990 or 990EZ.
Cat. No. 11285F
Schedule A (Form 990 or 990-EZ) 2012
Schedule A (Form 990 or 990-EZ) 2012
Page 2
Part II
Support Schedule for Organizations Described in Sections 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) 2008
(b) 2009
(c) 2010
(d) 2011
(e) 2012
(f) Total
1
Gifts, grants, contributions, and membership fees received. (Do not include any "unusual grants.") ....
523,881
536,338
679,516
633,951
407,703
2,781,389
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
523,881
536,338
679,516
633,951
407,703
2,781,389
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)..
915,935
6
Public support. Subtract line 5 from line 4.
1,865,454
Section B. Total Support
Calendar year
(or fiscal year beginning in)
(a) 2008
(b) 2009
(c) 2010
(d) 2011
(e) 2012
(f) Total
7
Amounts from line 4..
523,881
536,338
679,516
633,951
407,703
2,781,389
8
Gross income from interest, dividends, payments received on securities loans, rents, royalties and income from similar sources...
12,778
11,441
12,421
13,385
16,171
66,196
9
Net income from unrelated business activities, whether or not the business is regularly carried on..
0
10
Other income. Do not include gain or loss from the sale of capital assets (Explain in Part IV.)..
0
11
Total support (Add lines 7 through 10).
2,847,585
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 2012 (line 6, column (f) divided by line 11, column (f))
.........
14
65.510 %
15
Public support percentage for 2011 Schedule A, Part II, line 14
...............
15
67.970 %
16a
33 1/3% support test—2012.
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—2011.
If the organization did not check a 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—2012.
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—2011.
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) 2012
Schedule A (Form 990 or 990-EZ) 2012
Page 3
Part III
Support Schedule for Organizations Described in Section 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) 2008
(b) 2009
(c) 2010
(d) 2011
(e) 2012
(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) 2008
(b) 2009
(c) 2010
(d) 2011
(e) 2012
(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 2012 (line 8, column (f) divided by line 13, column (f))
.........
15
16
Public support percentage from 2011 Schedule A, Part III, line 15
...............
16
Section D. Computation of Investment Income Percentage
17
Investment income percentage for 2012 (line 10c, column (f) divided by line 13, column (f))
......
17
18
Investment income percentage from 2011 Schedule A, Part III, line 17
.............
18
19a
33 1/3% support tests—2012.
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—2011.
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) 2012
Schedule A (Form 990 or 990-EZ) 2012
Page 4
Part IV
Supplemental Information.
Complete this part to provide the explanations required by Part II, line 10; Part II, line 17a or 17b; and 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) 2012
Additional Data
Software ID:
12000229
Software Version:
2012v2.0
-
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
2012
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 15a
Form 990, Part VI, Line 15a: Compensation Review & Approval Process - CEO, Top Management
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 11b
Form 990, Part VI, Line 11b: Form 990 Review Process
Director reviews 990 prior to filing
Form 990, Part VI, Line 1a
Form 990, Part VI, Line 1a: Explanation of Delegated Broad Authority to Committee
There were 18 voting members of the board during the year. Three board members retired or stepped-down as of June 30, 2013, bringing the total number of board members at the end of the year to 15.
Client Note 1 - Public interest law firm: Attachment of legal cases participated in during the yearCook v FDA: WIN 7/23/2013: Unanimous decision by a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit, which overturned a federal district judge's March 2012 ruling that ordered the FDA to confiscate existing stocks of the execution drug sodium thiopental from state departments of corrections. In a lawsuit brought by 25 condemned murderers facing execution in Arizona, California, and Tennessee, the District Court held that the drug, which is widely used for executions, was illegally obtained form its foreign manufacturer and had to be confiscat4ed. On November 12, 2012, the Foundation filed an amicus curiae brief with the Court of Appeals, arguing that the district judge's order, which affects dozens of states who were not parties in the case, violates federal rules and the rights of affected states and ignores a fundamental requirement of due process. The Court's opinion cited and thanked the Criminal Justice Legal Foundation for providing a key argument it utilized in its decision.Salinas v. Texas: WIN 6/17/2013: U.S. Supreme Court case involving the admissibility of evidence in a double murder. Genovevo Salinas was suspected in the shotgun murder of brothers Juan and Hector Garza in Houston, Texas. His father gave the police his shotgun to examine. Salinas voluntarily went to the police station, not under arrest. He voluntarily answered the officer's questions except when he was asked if the shotgun would match the shells found at the crime scene. The trial court found that his silence and nervous demeanor were admissible, and he was convicted. He challenges this ruling under the Fifth Amendment. CJLF's brief argued that the constitutional right not to "be compelled . . . to be a witness" was not violated. By voluntarily speaking with the police, Salinas chose to be a witness. He was not compelled. The entire interview, including his non-answer to one question, is admissible. The Supreme Court affirmed in a divided opinion. The plurality opinion holds that because Salinas did not expressly invoke the Fifth Amendment privilege, his silence and demeanor could properly be considered. Trevino v. Thaler: LOSS 5/28/2013: U.S. Supreme Court case considering the limits on the number of times a convicted murderer can reopen his case. Trevino and other members of his gang abducted, raped, sodomized, and murdered Linda Sanchez, who was only 15 years old. Trevino's identity as a major participant in this atrocity was confirmed by a DNA test matching him to a blood stain on Linda's underwear. He was convicted and sentenced to death. Texas provided counsel to enable him to challenge his trial in two separate reviews of the case, including challenges to the effectiveness of his trial attorney. In federal court, Trevino wanted to make yet more claims against the effectiveness of his trial attorney, and he claimed the supposed ineffectiveness of his attorneys in the later review procedures as cause for not raising these claims earlier. The Federal District Court found that this basis for raising new claims this late in the process was contrary to a 1991 U.S. Supreme Court precedent, Coleman v. Thompson, won by CJLF. In addition, Trevino's belated mitigating evidence was so weak in comparison to the horrific crime and his utter lack of remorse that it would have made no difference. Trevino asked the U.S. Supreme Court to carve a large loophole in the Coleman rule, which would allow murderers to make belated claims in this situation, even if the claims have nothing to do with guilt of the crime. CJLF argued that the Coleman precedent is correct and should be maintained intact. A narrow majority of the Supreme Court agreed with the murderer, creating an exception that will further delay justice in capital cases if not corrected. Chaidez v. United States: WIN 2/23/2013: U.S. Supreme Court case involving the use of a new rule to overturn convictions entered years ago. Roselva Chaidez was convicted of fraud for her part in an insurance scam, claiming injuries in an accident that never happened. Immigration law requires aliens who commit frauds over $10,000 to be deported. Several years later, she falsely claimed on a naturalization petition that she had never been convicted of a crime, and the government began deportation proceedings. She now claims her conviction should be overturned because her criminal defense lawyer did not advise her of the immigration consequences of a plea, even though that was not a ground for overturning a plea at the time and even though she made no claim she did not commit the offense. In 2010, the Supreme Court created a new rule of law allowing guilty pleas to be attacked on this basis. The case threatens the landmark precedent of Teague v. Lane, won by CJLF in 1989. That case held that new rules of procedure cannot be used to go back and overturn convictions that are already final. Without this rule, many thousands of final convictions would be subject to overturning every time the Supreme Court alters the rules of procedure, as it often does. CJLF entered the case to argue that the rule against retroactivity strikes the correct balance and should be preserved. The high court agreed and left the judgment intact.In re Reno: WIN 8/30/2012: Unanimous California Supreme Court decision announcing that the lengthy and repetitive petitions for post-conviction review in death penalty cases constitute an abuse of the process and establishing new rules to reduce delay. The case involved the 1986 conviction and death sentence of pedophile Harold Memro for the brutal murders of three young boys in Los Angeles. After his conviction and sentence were affirmed by the state Supreme Court, Memro changed his name to Reno and filed a habeas corpus petition in Federal District Court, which included several unexhausted claims. In 2004, Reno presented those claims in the California Supreme Court. Over the next six years, the court granted 21 extensions to allow further argument. The Attorney General invited CJLF to submit argument showing why Reno's petition constituted an abuse of the legal process. CJLF noted that the current process in California allows defense attorneys to introduce several hundred-page petitions with scores of merit-less claims, although U.S. Supreme Court precedent encourages counsel to abandon weak claims and focus appeals on a few key issues. The California court's decision adopted that argument and set strict limits on future petitions.
For Paperwork Reduction Act Notice, see the Instructions for Form 990 or 990-EZ.