People v. Slater

California Court of Appeal Jul 26, 1957 No. Crim. 5962Published

Before: Shinn

AI Brief

AI-generated · verify before citing

Holding. The court held that the petition for writ of error coram nobis was properly denied because the petitioner failed to allege facts unknown at the time of the hearing, and because there is no absolute right to call witnesses at a probation revocation hearing.

Issues

Whether the trial court abused its discretion in revoking probation based on a probation officer's report.
Whether a probationer has a right to call witnesses at a probation revocation hearing.
Whether the petition for writ of error coram nobis stated sufficient grounds for relief.

Disposition. affirmed

Quotations verified verbatim against the opinion

“It is well settled that there is neither a constitutional nor a statutory right to a hearing preceding revocation of probation.”

“If a hearing is held, its procedure is not governed by the rules concerning criminal trials and a probationer does not have the absolute right to call witnesses in his behalf.”

SHINN, P. J.

This is an appeal from an order denying a petition for writ of error

coram nobis

whereby petitioner sought to vacate an order revoking probation.

An information was filed against petitioner in 1952, charging him with the commission of burglary, and alleging three prior felony convictions, to wit, robbery, murder and attempted extortion. It was alleged that Slater had served terms in the state prisons of Ohio and California for robbery and murder and that he had served a term in a federal prison on the charge of attempted extortion.

Petitioner pleaded guilty to burglary and the court found the offense to be burglary of the second degree; the court also found to be true the allegations of the prior convictions. On August 12, 1952, petitioner was sentenced to state prison for the term prescribed by law but sentence was suspended and he was placed on probation for five years on condition that he obtain employment and make restitution as directed by the probation department.

December 23, 1953, petitioner filed notice of motion to terminate probation, alleging compliance with the conditions of probation; he also submitted affidavits of friends and business acquaintances in support of that allegation. The probation department filed a report recommending denial of the motion and further recommending revocation of probation and execution of the suspended sentence. The report stated that petitioner had violated the conditions of probation in that he had not made restitution, had not registered as an ex-convict, was guilty of an assault upon his roommate, and had fled the scene of the affray before the police arrived. On February 12, 1954, after a hearing in Slater’s presence, the court revoked his probation and remanded him to custody for the term prescribed by law.

March 29, 1957, the instant petition was filed, setting forth as grounds for issuance of the writ that petitioner is innocent of the violations of probation set out in the report, that the court refused to allow his witnesses to testify at the hearing, and that the order revoking probation was made through mistake of fact. The court below denied the petition, holding that it stated no facts which would entitle petitioner to relief.

Upon application of petitioner for appointment of counsel,

[816]

People v. Slater

AI Brief

SHINN, P. J.

More from California Court of Appeal

Related research

AI Brief