In Re Flodstrom

California Court of Appeal Dec 14, 1954 No. Crim. 3091Published

Before: Kaufman

AI Brief

AI-generated · verify before citing

Holding. The court held that the petitioner was held to answer for murder without reasonable and probable cause because the prosecution failed to establish the corpus delicti independently of the petitioner's extrajudicial confessions and admissions.

Issues

Whether the corpus delicti of a crime must be established by evidence independent of the accused's extrajudicial statements to justify holding the accused to answer.
Whether the evidence presented at the preliminary hearing, excluding the petitioner's confessions, was sufficient to establish a prima facie case of criminal agency in the death of the infant.

Disposition. Petitioner discharged from custody.

Quotations verified verbatim against the opinion

“the corpus delicti must be established independently of admissions of the defendant.”

“Disregarding the confession and admissions of the accused there is no proof, even slight, of any criminal agency that caused the death of the infant child.”

“we must hold that the petitioner was held to answer without reasonable and probable cause and that she is entitled to be discharged from custody.”

[872]

KAUFMAN, J.

Petitioner, Shirley Ann Flodstrom, seeks discharge from custody pursuant to a writ of habeas corpus issued out of this court on the ground that she is being held to answer for the crime of murder without a showing of reasonable and probable cause. Petitioner alleges that she was arrested on October 12, 1954, and a complaint was filed in the Municipal Court for the San Jose-Alviso Judicial District, County of Santa Clara, charging her with murder. A preliminary examination followed in the municipal court on October 22, 1954, after which petitioner was held to answer to the superior court. On October 29, 1954 an information was filed in the superior court charging her with a violation of Penal Code, section 187. On November 5, 1954, at petitioner’s arraignment her attorney moved to set aside the information pursuant to Penal Code, section 995, paragraph 2. (Defendant committed without reasonable or probable cause.) This motion was denied on November 12, 1954, by the superior court judge. No prior application has been made for a writ of habeas corpus.

Attached to the petition as Exhibit A is the testimony taken at the preliminary hearing on October 22, 1954. The events which culminated in the detention of petitioner are presented in this testimony. It appears that the only witness to testify at the hearing was a detective in the police department. He testified on direct examination that he went to the home of petitioner on October 6, 1954, and there viewed the dead body of David Flodstrom, 6 months old, the son of petitioner. He further testified that the petitioner then told him that she found the sleeve of the pajama top crammed in the baby’s mouth. According to the testimony, on October 7, 1954, this police officer again went to petitioner’s home accompanied by the deputy coroner. Both of these officers questioned petitioner at that time. The police officer further testified that the petitioner was brought to the police station on October 12, 1954, where she confessed to the crime charged and signed a written statement to that effect. The police officer testified that petitioner told him that she crammed the pajama sleeve in the baby’s mouth with her fingers because she was angry with her husband and wished to get even with him.

On cross-examination the police officer testified that when he arrived at the petitioner’s house on October 6, he found the deceased baby lying on his back in his

In Re Flodstrom

AI Brief

KAUFMAN, J.

More from California Court of Appeal

Related research

AI Brief