In Re Eads

California Court of Appeal Feb 22, 1980 No. Crim. 4689Published

Before: Brown (g.A.)

AI Brief

AI-generated · verify before citing

Holding. The court held that a trial court may order a diagnostic commitment under Penal Code section 1203.03 for a defendant who has entered a conditional plea, but the defendant must be granted the right to withdraw that plea upon such commitment.

Issues

Whether Penal Code section 1203.03 authorizes a diagnostic commitment for a defendant who has entered a conditional plea of guilty.
Whether a defendant has the right to withdraw a guilty plea upon being committed for a diagnostic evaluation under Penal Code section 1203.03.

Disposition. Granted in part and denied in part.

Quotations verified verbatim against the opinion

“the legality of petitioner’s diagnostic commitment turns upon whether he stood convicted of an offense punishable by imprisonment in the state prison on November 21, 1979”

“the trial court is thereby authorized to withdraw its prior approval of a conditional plea at the time set for pronouncement of judgment”

“we shall give effect to the condition by holding that petitioner had the right to withdraw his guilty plea upon being committed for diagnostic evaluation.”

Opinion

BROWN (G. A.), P. J.

Petitioner seeks a writ of habeas corpus directing that he be released from custody and directing the Superior Court

[501]

of Merced County to allow him to withdraw his plea of guilty to pending criminal charges.

Facts

On October 12, 1979, an information was filed in the Merced County Superior Court charging petitioner with assault by means of force likely to produce great bodily injury in violation of Penal Code section 245, subdivision (a), and inflicting great bodily injury during the commission of the assault in violation of Penal Code section 12022.7.

On October 23, 1979, petitioner entered a conditional plea of guilty to the assault charge; the conditions were that the great bodily injury allegation be dismissed, the sentence be no greater than one year in county jail, and such sentence run concurrently with all misdemeanor cases pending against petitioner. The trial court tentatively accepted the conditional plea, stating it would make a final determination after reading the probation report.

On November 20, 1979, petitioner appeared for sentencing; the hearing was continued until November 21, 1979.

On November 21, 1979, the trial court ordered petitioner committed to the custody of the Department of Corrections for a diagnostic evaluation pursuant to Penal Code section 1203.03.

Discussion

Petitioner contends that Penal Code section 1203.03 does not authorize the order committing him for diagnostic evaluation because he was not convicted of an offense punishable by imprisonment in the state prison. We disagree.

A trial court’s authority to order a criminal defendant committed to the custody of the Department of Corrections for a diagnostic evaluation pursuant to Penal Code section 1203.03 is limited by the express language of that statute—the defendant must be "... convicted of an offense punishable by imprisonment in the state prison.... ” Thus, the legality of petitioner’s diagnostic commitment turns upon whether he stood convicted of an offense punishable by imprisonment in the state prison on November 21, 1979, the date of the diagnostic commitment.

In Re Eads

AI Brief

BROWN (G. A.), P. J.

More from California Court of Appeal

Related research

AI Brief