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. Information about Schedule A (Form 990 or 990-EZ) and its instructions is at www.irs.gov/form990.
OMB No. 1545-0047
2013
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) 2013
Schedule A (Form 990 or 990-EZ) 2013
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) 2009
(b) 2010
(c) 2011
(d) 2012
(e) 2013
(f) Total
1
Gifts, grants, contributions, and membership fees received. (Do not include any "unusual grants.") ....
536,338
679,516
633,951
407,703
447,424
2,704,932
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
536,338
679,516
633,951
407,703
447,424
2,704,932
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)..
908,553
6
Public support. Subtract line 5 from line 4.
1,796,379
Section B. Total Support
Calendar year
(or fiscal year beginning in)
(a) 2009
(b) 2010
(c) 2011
(d) 2012
(e) 2013
(f) Total
7
Amounts from line 4..
536,338
679,516
633,951
407,703
447,424
2,704,932
8
Gross income from interest, dividends, payments received on securities loans, rents, royalties and income from similar sources...
11,441
12,421
13,385
16,171
14,165
67,583
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).
2,772,515
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 2013 (line 6, column (f) divided by line 11, column (f))
.........
14
64.790 %
15
Public support percentage for 2012 Schedule A, Part II, line 14
...............
15
65.510 %
16a
33 1/3% support test—2013.
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—2012.
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—2013.
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—2012.
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) 2013
Schedule A (Form 990 or 990-EZ) 2013
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) 2009
(b) 2010
(c) 2011
(d) 2012
(e) 2013
(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) 2009
(b) 2010
(c) 2011
(d) 2012
(e) 2013
(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 2013 (line 8, column (f) divided by line 13, column (f))
.........
15
16
Public support percentage from 2012 Schedule A, Part III, line 15
...............
16
Section D. Computation of Investment Income Percentage
17
Investment income percentage for 2013 (line 10c, column (f) divided by line 13, column (f))
......
17
18
Investment income percentage from 2012 Schedule A, Part III, line 17
.............
18
19a
33 1/3% support tests—2013.
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—2012.
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) 2013
Schedule A (Form 990 or 990-EZ) 2013
Page 4
Part IV
Supplemental Information.
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) 2013
Additional Data
Software ID:
13000170
Software Version:
2013v3.1
-
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.
Information about Schedule O (Form 990 or 990-EZ) and its instructions is at
www.irs.gov/form990.
OMB No. 1545-0047
2013
Open to Public Inspection
Name of the organization
Criminal Justice Legal Foundation
Employer identification number
94-2798865
Return Reference
Explanation
Client Note 1
Client Note 1 - Public interest law firm: Attachment of legal cases participated in during the year. Rulings favoring the Foundations positions are listed as WINS and unfavorable rulings are LOSSES. Rulings which have left the issue unsettled are DRAWS:Hall v. Florida: 5/27/14. WIN U. S. Supreme Court decision announcing that, when determining the IQ of a murder defendant who claims he is ineligible for the death penalty because he is mentally retarded, states should not use a rigid cutoff score that does not account for a margin of error. The case involved a murderer's claim that the IQ requirement for mental retardation should be expanded from a score of below 70 to a range of 67 to 75. In 1981, Freddie Lee Hall, and an accomplice, kidnapped a 21-year-old pregnant woman from a grocery store parking lot and drove her into the woods where she was raped, beaten, and shot to death. After two decades of appeals upholding Halls conviction and sentence, the Supreme Court decided in another case that executing the mentally retarded was unconstitutional. At that time, the Florida Legislature had already adopted a nationally accepted standard, which included an IQ below 70 to qualify. Hall, whose lowest IQ score was 71, asked the Supreme Court to broaden the range to include him. When the Supreme Court agreed to hear Halls appeal, CJLF accepted the Florida Attorney Generals request to join the case. CJLF argued that standards for mental retardation should be left up to the states. Otherwise, well-deserved sentences for clearly guilty murderers will be held up for years as these issues are endlessly reviewed.People v. Moffett: 5/5/14. DRAW California Supreme Court ruling that a California law, which allows murderers between the ages of 16 and 18 years old to be eligible for a sentence of life without the possibility of parole (LWOP), does not violate the U. S. Supreme Courts June 2012 decision in Miller v. Alabama. The case involves a criminal (a few days short of his 18th birthday) who committed an armed robbery along with an accomplice. During their attempted escape, the accomplice shot and killed a police officer. Andrew Moffett was convicted of the murder of Officer Larry Lasater, which is a death penalty offense for murderers over 18. Because of his age, he received a sentence of LWOP. During sentencing, the judge noted that she was exercising her discretion to give this sentence, rather than life with parole, due to the circumstances of the crime. While Moffetts case was on appeal, the U. S. Supreme Court, in Miller v. Alabama, abolished mandatory LWOP for murderers under 18. The state Court of Appeals overturned Moffetts sentence announcing that it violated the spirit of Miller. When the California Supreme Court agreed to hear the states appeal, CJLF filed an amicus curiae brief on behalf of Officer Lasaters wife, mother, and brother arguing to reinstate Moffetts sentence. The brief noted that the Miller ruling bars mandatory LWOP for murderers under the age of 18, while California law gives judges sentencing discretion. The state Supreme Court agreed, but due to Millers expanded factors that must be considered at sentencing, Moffetts case was sent back to the original trial judge for re-sentencing.White v. Woodall: 4/23/14. WIN A 6-3 U. S. Supreme Court decision to reverse a 2012 federal appeals court ruling which had improperly held the murderer's death sentence unconstitutional. Undisputed evidence, including a DNA match, proved that on the evening of January 25, 1997, Woodall kidnapped high school cheerleader Sarah Hansen from a convenience store and took her to a nearby lake where he raped and beat her before slitting her throat. After Woodall pled guilty to the crimes, the sentencing jury heard testimony from 14 witnesses supporting a life sentence, but Woodall did not take the stand. Following his conviction and sentence, Woodall won a federal court ruling overturning his death sentence, announcing that the judge had violated his rights by failing to tell the jury to ignore his decision not to testify. When the Supreme Court agreed to hear the case, CJLF accepted the Kentucky Attorney Generals invitation to file argument. The Foundation argued that there is no Supreme Court precedent requiring a no adverse inference instruction at a sentencing hearing and, as such, the claim was properly denied by the state courts. The brief noted that the federal appeals court had exceeded its authority in order to void Woodalls sentence. The Supreme Courts decision overturning the lower court cited CJLF Legal Director Kent Scheidegger for providing the key argument.Kansas v. Cheever: 12/11/13. WIN Unanimous U. S. Supreme Court decision to overturn a Kansas court ruling, which held that the Constitution prohibited a prosecution expert from testifying in rebuttal to a cop killers expert on a mental defense claim. In 2005, drug dealer Scott Cheever shot and killed a Kansas county sheriff who was serving an arrest warrant. Cheever shot at several other officers before he surrendered. At trial, a pharmacist testified that Cheever was too high on drugs to have intended to kill the sheriff. Over Cheevers objection, the prosecution introduced an expert who testified that Cheever knew what he was doing on the day of the murder. The Kansas Supreme Court later overturned Cheevers conviction and death sentence, finding that, with the exception of a claim of mental illness, the Constitution did not allow a compelled examination by a prosecution expert to rebut defense experts on other mental defenses, such as intoxication. CJLF joined the state Attorney Generals appeal to argue that the Kansas courts holding was not supported by the Constitution or any Supreme Court precedent.Cook v. FDA: 7/23/13. WIN Unanimous decision by a three-judge panel of the U. S. Court of Appeals for the D. C. Circuit, which overturned a federal district judges 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 from its foreign manufacturer and had to be confiscated. On November 12, 2012, the Foundation filed an amicus curiae brief with the Court of Appeals, arguing that the district judges order, which affects many 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 courts opinion cited and thanked the Criminal Justice Legal Foundation for providing a key argument that it utilized in its decision.Salinas v. Texas: 6/17/13. WIN U. S. Supreme Court decision utilizing CJLF arguments to reject a Texas murderer's claim that his incriminating behavior during a voluntary interview with police should have been excluded from his trial. The case involved the 1992 shotgun murders of two brothers in Houston. After police learned that Genovevo Salinas may have been involved, they visited his parents home, where he also lived. During the visit, Salinass father turned over his shotgun to the police, and Salinas agreed to go to the police station for a voluntary interview. After an hour of answering questions, when asked if the shells found at the murder scene would match the shotgun, Salinas stared at the floor and would not answer. Testing later revealed that the shells were a match, and a witness came forward telling police that Salinas admitted to the murders. At trial, the jury learned that Salinas had refused to answer the shotgun question. Following his conviction, Salinas appealed, arguing that informing the jury of his silence violated the Fifth Amendment. CJLF joined the Supreme Court review of this case to argue that a suspects behavior during a voluntary interview is evidence which should not be kept from the jury. The Courts 5-4 decision agreed.
Form 990, Part VI, Line 1a: Explanation of Delegated Broad Authority to Committee
There were 15 voting members of the board during the year.
Form 990, Part VI, Line 11b: Form 990 Review Process
Director reviews 990 prior to filing
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 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 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 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.
For Paperwork Reduction Act Notice, see the Instructions for Form 990 or 990-EZ.