In Re Perez

California Court of Appeal Jan 19, 1966 No. Crim. 3932Published

Before: Warne

AI Brief

AI-generated · verify before citing

Holding. The court granted a writ of habeas corpus, vacating a judgment and sentence for felony escape because the petitioner was erroneously charged with and convicted of a crime he did not commit.

Issues

Whether a prisoner is entitled to habeas corpus relief when convicted and sentenced under a statute that does not prohibit his conduct.
Whether a guilty plea to an erroneously charged felony escape is valid when the defendant was actually a misdemeanor prisoner.

Disposition. granted

Quotations verified verbatim against the opinion

“The answer to this is that petitioner stands convicted of and is incarcerated for a crime he did not commit.”

“a defendant is entitled to habeas corpus if there is no material dispute as to the facts relating to his conviction and if it appears that the statu ce under which he was convicted did not prohibit his conduct.”

“The petition for a writ of habeas corpus is granted and the judgment and sentence for felony escape is vacated and set aside.”

WARNS, J. pro tem.

Petitioner herein filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus. He seeks to have certain judgments and commitments under which he is confined to the state prison declared void and the sentences set aside. Since the facts as alleged in the verified petition disclosed that petitioner was improperly charged with and sentenced for the crime of escape while serving a sentence for a felony rather than escape while serving a sentence for a misdemeanor in the jail of Fresno County, this court issued an order to show cause and respondent made return.

All of the relevant facts relating to this matter appear in exhibits attached to the return to the order to show cause.

Concerning the escape conviction, it appears that at the time of petitioner’s preliminary hearing in the Municipal Court of the Fresno Judicial District petitioner was fully informed by the magistrate of his constitutional right to be represented by an attorney at all stages of the proceedings and also of his right to refuse to take the witness stand or incriminate himself. The petitioner nevertheless waived his right to be represented by counsel, stating: “Well, I’m going to plead guilty so I don’t think I need a lawyer for that.” Petitioner then took the witness stand and testified that he was in the custody of the Sheriff of Fresno County on Janu

[468]

ary 15, 1962, serving a 90-day sentence for petty theft; that he was assigned to a work detail at the Fresno Juvenile Hall; and that he “just walked away.” He was arrested in Monterey about two months later. Petitioner was held to answer to the Superior Court of Fresno County on the charge of escape.

An information was filed in the Superior Court of Fresno County erroneously charging petitioner with a violation of subdivision (b) of section 4532 of the Penal Code (an escape of a prisoner convicted of a felony). The proper charge should have been escape under subdivision (a) of said section, i.e., escape of a prisoner convicted of a misdemeanor. Under subdivision (a) if the escape was not by force or violence the penalty is imprisonment in the state prison for not less than six months nor more than five years, regardless of any prior convictions, or in the county jail not exceeding one year; while under subdivision (b) the convicted person is punishable by imprisonment in the state prison not exceeding 10 years, or in the county jail not exceeding one year. A prior felony based on a Youth Authority commitment for burglary was also charged in the information.

In Re Perez

AI Brief

More from California Court of Appeal

Related research

AI Brief