Scott Peterson’s latest appeal largely denied, but legal options remain
AI-generated summary reviewed by our newsroom.
- California court rejected 18 of 19 claims in Scott Peterson's latest appeal.
- Juror bias allegation remains in play; Peterson has 60 days to respond.
- Peterson may pursue further legal action in state or federal court systems.
The majority of convicted murderer Scott Peterson’s latest petition to be set free was denied by the California Courts of Appeal on Thursday.
But not all of the filing was dismissed and several legal options still remain for Peterson, 52, who has been on a years-long effort to over his conviction in the 2002 death of his wife, Laci, and their unborn son, Conner. Peterson is serving a life sentence, without the possibility of parole. He was originally sentenced to death in 2004, but that sentence was overturned in 2020. He was re-sentenced to life in prison the next year.
The Los Angeles Innocence Project, which represents Peterson, submitted a petition in a state appeals court on April 24 claiming he should be granted a new trial because of evidence and previously dismissed eyewitness testimony. The petition also included a 140-page declaration written by Peterson.
Only one of the 19 claims listed in Peterson’s petition for writ of habeus corpus — a court order to present a defendant before a judge to justify their detention — was accepted to be heard. The claim is that one of the jurors in his 2004 murder trial should have been dismissed.
Peterson has 60 days to respond to the appeals court’s decision.
The juror matter was previously heard and ruled on during an appeal in county court two years ago. At that time, Peterson’s attorneys argued that Juror No. 7, Richelle Nice, was biased against Peterson. The claim was based on how she answered her juror questionnaire, where she stated she’d never been the victim or witness of a crime, or a party in a lawsuit.
This turned out to not be entirely accurate, because Nice was involved in a domestic violence incident with her boyfriend in 2001 and a year prior had filed a restraining order against that boyfriend’s ex-girlfriend. Peterson’s attorneys argued that this and other evidence were reasons Peterson should be granted a new trial.
San Mateo Superior Court Judge Anne-Christine Massullo rejected Peterson’s claims, saying at the time, “The Court concludes that Juror No. 7’s responses were not motivated by preexisting or improper bias against Petitioner, but instead were the result of combination of good-faith misunderstanding of the questions and sloppiness in answering.”
Peterson is now challenging this decision in appeals court, with the LA Innocence Project — not affiliated with the Innocence Project — arguing he was deprived of his Fifth, Sixth, and Eighth Amendment rights to a fair and impartial jury due to juror misconduct and bias.
LAIP’s claims of new evidence and all other claims tied to this new appeal were rejected Thursday with the court writing that Peterson’s request “does not show that any extraordinary reason exists” for it to be heard by the state appeals court.
What’s next?
Janey Peterson, sister-in-law and advocate of Peterson, indicated LAIP likely would respond to the court’s decision. She said the appeals court process would not have any hearings, so a public appearance by Scott Peterson is unlikely.
All of the other claims rejected by the state appeals court can and should be filed in a Superior Court, according to the appeals court’s decision. Peterson also can file his claims and appeals in California’s Supreme Court and in federal court.
A federal petition would start in the U.S. Northern District Court, since the case was tried in San Mateo County. If Peterson lost his case there, it could be appealed to the U.S. Ninth Circuit Court of appeals and finally, he could seek review of the habeas petition by the U.S. Supreme Court.
Janey Peterson said that while slim, an argument by the LAIP could be made that while proceedings are taking place, Peterson should be released due to time served. Courts can release a prisoner if there’s a favorable ruling on their behalf in appeals, but it is not common.
Laci Peterson, 27, was eight months pregnant when she vanished from the couple’s Modesto home on Christmas Eve 2002. The remains of her body and of the unborn child were found washed up on a rocky shore in San Francisco Bay in April 2003 by a woman walking her dog. Laci and Conner were found near where Scott Peterson had told police he had been fishing when his wife disappeared. Four days after the remains were discovered, Peterson was arrested for murder.
Peterson is now serving his life sentence at Mule Creek State Prison.
This story was originally published June 2, 2025 at 10:03 AM with the headline "Scott Peterson’s latest appeal largely denied, but legal options remain."
