People v. Little

HART, J.

The defendant, a prisoner undergoing a judgment of imprisonment in the state prison at Folsom, was charged by information filed in the superior court of Sacramento County with the crime of escaping from the custody and surveillance of the prison guards while he was employed and engaged in highway work on the outside of said prison. The jury found him guilty as charged and he appeals from the judgment and the order denying him a new trial. In the month of October, 1923, the defendant was, with other convicts, assigned by the prison authorities to work on the state highways, and at the time of effecting his escape from the custody of the- prison guards under whom he was so employed he was engaged in such employment in Shasta County. On the evening of the 14th of January, 1924, while he was so employed, and after he had partaken of his dinner,

[676]

he left the camp and did not return. His absence having been noticed by the guards, pursuit of the defendant was inaugurated and he was on the following day apprehended and taken into custody by one of the guards while he was some distance from the camp at which he was employed, walking in the direction of the city of Redding. There is no dispute as to these facts and they are sufficient to support the verdict.

On the arraignment of the defendant his counsel suggested to the court that he was at that time insane and requested the court to submit the question of his sanity to a jury prior to putting him upon his trial. This request was supported by an affidavit of the mother of the defendant, in which she gave a history of the life of the accused and detailed facts indicating that from the time that he was six years of age he was disposed to leave home at intervals and remain away for a considerable period of time and then return, not being able to give any reason for his conduct. This predilection for wandering from home, she averred, occurred from time to time until the year 1921, when he was examined in the state of Washington on a charge of insanity and committed by the authorities to the insane asylum, from which, so she further averred, he escaped or “wandered away” and to which he “has never been returned.” No counter-showing was made by the district attorney; but the court examined the affidavit of the defendant’s mother and stated that the document had not generated in the mind of the judge any doubt as to the defendant’s sanity and ordered the trial of the case to be proceeded with, saying, however: “If it appears at any time before judgment to the court that the defendant is insane the court will order the matter submitted to the jury. . . . The court hasn’t any doubt as to the sanity at this time.” After the case for the people was closed, the defendant introduced the affidavit of the defendant’s mother. The brother of the defendant was called as a witness for the defense. He testified to the peculiar actions of the accused from the time that he was a mere boy, particularly as to his disposition to leave his home without telling anyone of his intention to do so and returning at unexpected times. He stated that his brother was possessed of the delusion that people were after him to do