Lisa Jensen Petitions to Delay Law License Suspension: Victim’s Lifelong Hardship Takes a Back Seat
- Rex Ballard
- 10 minutes ago
- 4 min read
As we reported back on February 23 in “Shasta County Attorney Convicted in DUI Scooter Crash That Severely Injured Elderly Pedestrian,” local criminal defense attorney Lisa Marie Jensen (State Bar #284968) was found guilty by a Shasta County jury of felony DUI causing injury and reckless driving causing injury, plus a great bodily injury enhancement. The charges stemmed from the November 17, 2023, incident on Placer Street in which Jensen, riding an electric scooter downhill on a sidewalk where such use is prohibited, slammed into elderly pedestrian Calvin Johanessen from behind while under the influence of alcohol.
That earlier story laid out the shocking details: Johanessen, who was on blood thinners at the time, was knocked unconscious, suffered a broken collarbone, a deep ankle laceration requiring stitches, and nearly bled out at the scene before being rushed to Mercy Medical Center. More than two years later, he remains unable to walk without assistance. The injuries have been life-altering and, by all accounts, permanent.
On March 20, 2026, Jensen was sentenced to 120 days in Shasta County Jail (with 90 days suspended, meaning she served just 30 days starting May 1), five years of formal probation, and a three-year driver’s license suspension. This was her third alcohol-related offense; she had a prior DUI that was reduced to reckless driving. Many in the community expressed disbelief at the relatively lenient jail term given the severity of the victim’s injuries and Jensen’s role as a prominent DUI defense attorney who has spent years representing clients facing the very charges she now faced herself.
Now, with her California State Bar interim suspension set to take effect May 25, 2026 (State Bar Court case SBC-26-C-30278), Jensen has filed a Petition for Stay of Interim Suspension. In the petition filed May 1, 2026, she admits the February 17, 2026, felony convictions but claims, “This matter is currently pending appeal in the Third District Court of Appeal under case number C106013.” She adds that further proceedings in the trial court are scheduled for July 10, 2026, during which the court expects to consider motions for dismissal, new trial, or reduction of the charges, and has “affirmatively commented that issues raised at that hearing may affect the sentence.”
Her new counsel, she states, “has expressed an intention to seek a new trial, dismissal, or reduction of the charges based on the manner in which the case was prosecuted.”
She is asking the State Bar Court to stay (pause) the interim suspension, arguing it would create undue hardship for her family (she calls herself the primary or sole financial provider) and her two remaining private clients on diversion.
Let’s be clear about whose hardship we should be weighing here.
Calvin Johanessen didn’t get to petition for a “stay” on his broken body. He didn’t get to argue that permanent mobility limitations, chronic pain, and the terror of a simple walk turning into a nightmare were somehow inconvenient to his family. He has lived with the consequences of Jensen’s choices every single day for over two and a half years. The victim’s ongoing suffering stands in stark contrast to Jensen’s claim that losing her ability to practice law—even temporarily—would be too burdensome.
As an officer of the court and a licensed attorney who has built her career defending people accused of DUI and other crimes, Jensen is held to a higher standard. The public trusts that those who enforce and interpret the law will not flagrantly violate it themselves. The irony here is impossible to ignore: a DUI defense specialist convicted of felony DUI (allegedly her 3rd alcohol related offense), causing great bodily injury, now asking for special consideration so she can keep practicing.
Public sentiment in Shasta County has been loud and consistent. Many cannot believe the sentence wasn’t longer, given the facts, the priors, and the victim’s devastating, permanent injuries. Reports from court observers also note that Jensen has shown little visible remorse for the harm she caused.
The California State Bar’s disciplinary process exists precisely to protect the public and maintain the integrity of the legal profession. It is not required to weigh an attorney’s client list or family circumstances above the seriousness of a felony conviction involving injury, especially when that conviction involves moral turpitude and repeats a pattern of alcohol-related driving.
If you believe, as many in our community do, that Lisa Jensen should not be granted leniency on her law license, the proper channel is to make your voice heard through official State Bar procedures:
File a formal complaint (free and easy) at: https://apps.calbar.ca.gov/complaint/
Reference State Bar Court case 26-C-30278 and include any public court records, victim impact information, or observations about the case.
You can also check her current public attorney profile here: https://apps.calbar.ca.gov/attorney/Licensee/Detail/284968
The State Bar’s mission is public protection first. Hardship claims from the convicted attorney should not eclipse the lifelong hardship inflicted on Calvin Johanessen and his family.
Shasta Unfiltered will continue to follow this case as the State Bar Court considers Jensen’s petition. Accountability matters—especially when the person asking for a break understands the law and the consequences it should have on her actions.
