POLSKY LAW OFFICE
Attorney Profile
David Polsky is a seasoned appellate attorney with over 25 years of experience representing indigent criminal appellants before the California Supreme Court and California Courts of Appeal. With a practice rooted in dedication to justice and meticulous legal analysis, David has handled hundreds of appeals spanning a broad range of criminal matters. He is recognized for his precise legal writing and thoughtful advocacy.
David began his career as a Deputy Attorney General with the California Department of Justice, gaining valuable insight into the prosecution side of appeals before transitioning to defense. His passion lies in ensuring that every client, regardless of means, receives a vigorous and fair appellate defense.
Experience
1999 - Present
Polsky Law Office
Owner & Sole Practitioner
David has spent the last quarter century representing indigent criminal appellants in California courts. As a panel attorney for multiple appellate projects, he has handled a wide range of felony appeals across the state. His work is marked by in-depth legal analysis, strong written advocacy, and a commitment to ensuring fair outcomes for clients within the criminal justice system.
1996 - 1999
Deputy Attorney General
California Department of Justice
David started his career as a Deputy Attorney General with the California Department of Justice in Los Angeles, handling criminal appeals on behalf of the state. He drafted appellate briefs, argued cases before California and federal appellate courts, and gained firsthand experience in the prosecution side of appellate litigation—insight that now informs his work as a defense attorney.
Education
1992 - 1995
Juris Doctor
University of Connecticut
David earned his Juris Doctor (JD) from the University of Connecticut School of Law in 1995, graduating with honors. As a student, he was deeply engaged in the Criminal Appellate Clinic, where he gained valuable hands-on experience in legal research, brief writing, and appellate advocacy—skills that helped shape his commitment to justice and the legal profession.
1986 - 1992
BA, Communication Studies
University of California,
Los Angeles
David received his Bachelor of Arts in Communication Studies from UCLA in 1992, graduating Magna Cum Laude and earning membership in Phi Beta Kappa. His academic focus on media, rhetoric, and public discourse laid the groundwork for his analytical thinking and persuasive communication skills.
Recent Victories
People v. Delange
(Case No. B331234, July 2, 2025)
The Court of Appeal reversed the judge’s order finding appellant guilty of elder abuse and various related enhancements and sentencing him thereon, holding that the judge lacked the authority to make those findings.
People v. Young
(Case No. B334422, February 25, 2025)
The Court of Appeal reversed the judge’s summary denial of appellant’s request to vacate his murder conviction and ordered the judge to conduct an evidentiary hearing on whether there was sufficient evidence to support his conviction.
People v. Rivera
(Case No. A166280, November 21, 2024)
The Court of Appeal reversed the judge’s finding that appellant was guilty of murder based on the judge’s application of the wrong burden of proof.
In re C.W.
(Case No. E077739, February 28, 2024)
The Court of Appeal reversed the juvenile court judge’s finding that appellant was not a suitable candidate for adjudication as a minor and the judge’s order transferring appellant’s case to adult criminal court.
People v. Malloy
(Case No. B317367, January 3, 2024)
The Court of Appeal reversed one of appellant’s two convictions for unlawfully possessing a firearm on two different dates, where the evidence showed his possession was continuous and thus constituted only one offense.
People v. Mancilla
(Case No. F082925, December 29, 2023)
The Court of Appeal reversed appellant’s two murder convictions, finding that the judge prejudicially erred by failing to instruct the jury on voluntary manslaughter based on unreasonable self-defense.
People v. Schuller
(Case No. S272237, August 17, 2023)
The Supreme Court reversed the Court of Appeal’s opinion that the judge’s erroneous failure to instruct on voluntary manslaughter based on unreasonable self-defense was harmless. The Supreme Court held that the Court of Appeal had applied the wrong harmless-error standard and remanded the case back to the Court of Appeal for reconsideration. The Court of Appeal reversed the murder conviction. (See People v. Schuller (Case No. C087191, January 17, 2024).)
People v. Okuwoga
(Case No. F083126, August 3, 2023)
The Court of Appeal reversed the jury’s finding that appellant’s conduct was gang-related due to insufficient evidence and ordered him to receive a new sentencing hearing.
People v. Kersting
(Case No. A166718, July 10, 2023)
The Court of Appeal reversed the judge’s order summarily denying appellant’s request to vacate his murder conviction and remanded the case for reconsideration.
People v. Ware
(Case No. D072515, March 27, 2023)
The Court of Appeal reversed appellant’s conviction for participating in a criminal gang conspiracy and the jury’s various true findings that his conduct was gang-related.
People v. Brown
(Case No. S257631, March 2, 2023)
The Supreme Court reversed appellant’s conviction of murder by means of poison in the death of her infant daughter, who was exposed to drugs through appellant’s breastmilk, based on the judge’s inaccurate instruction to the jury on the elements of the crime.
People v. Delange
(Case No. B312629, January 3, 2023)
The Court of Appeal reversed the judge’s finding that there was sufficient evidence appellant committed felony murder to deny his request to vacate his murder conviction and ordered the judge to vacate the murder conviction and resentence appellant.
People v. Vang
(Case No. C090365, August 5, 2022)
The Court of Appeal reversed appellant’s felony murder conviction where the judge erred by permitting the prosecution to proceed on the legally inadequate theory that his wife’s death was murder where she jumped from his moving truck to escape him.