Scoggins v. Superior Court

California Court of Appeal Jan 12, 1977 No. Civ. 49255Published

Before: Compton

AI Brief

AI-generated · verify before citing

Holding. The court held that a prior conviction based on a plea bargain is not constitutionally defective for failing to advise the defendant of the full range of possible sentences, provided the record shows the defendant was aware of the consequences of the plea and the sentence imposed was in accordance with the bargain.

Issues

Whether a prior conviction is constitutionally invalid because the defendant was not advised of the full range of possible sentences at the time of his plea.
Whether a plea bargain satisfies the requirement that a defendant be aware of the consequences of his plea.

Disposition. affirmed

Quotations verified verbatim against the opinion

“The record here shows clearly that defendant was aware of the consequences of his plea.”

“Common sense dictates that the court need only apprise defendant of the sentence possibilities in a general fashion.”

“In the case of a plea bargain, such as the one reached in this case, the sentence is fixed prior to the plea and is known to the defendant.”

Opinion

COMPTON, J.

John R. Scoggins, who is the petitioner in this case, appeals from a judgment of the superior court denying his petition for a writ of mandate.

Because these proceedings arise from a criminal prosecution in which Scoggins is a defendant we will for the sake of clarity refer to him as defendant. The respondent People of the State of California are represented by the City Attorney of the City of Los Angeles.

In February of 1975, defendant was charged with violating Vehicle Code section 23102, subdivision (a) (driving under the influence of alcohol). The complaint alleged that defendant had suffered a prior conviction of the same offense in June of 1974. The effect of the prior conviction, if proved, is to aggravate the punishment in the event defendant is convicted of the present offense by imposition of a mandatory term in jail and a suspension of driving privileges.

Apparently at this writing which is almost two years from the time of the filing of the instant complaint, defendant has not yet been tried. This delay understandably has been occasioned by defendant’s efforts to invalidate the prior conviction. Defendant first moved the trial court in November of 1975 and again in February 1976 to declare the prior conviction to be constitutionally invalid. Both motions were denied.

On February 25, 1976, defendant petitioned the superior court for a writ of mandate. That court issued an alternative writ but on April 16, 1976, that writ was discharged and the petition was denied. This appeal followed.

[876]

The prior conviction which is at issue here was the result of defendant pleading nolo contendere in the municipal court case No. 603733 on June 5, 1974, pursuant to a plea bargain. In that case sentence was suspended, defendant was placed on two years probation on condition that he pay a fine of $250. The trial judge ordered that defendant’s driver’s license not be suspended.

The record discloses that prior to entry of the plea, defendant, who was represented by counsel at all times, was fully advised by the judge of his right to a jury trial, right of confrontation and right against self-incrimination. Defendant voluntarily waived all of these rights.

Scoggins v. Superior Court

AI Brief

COMPTON, J.

More from California Court of Appeal

Related research

AI Brief