In Re Pearlmutter

Good Law
128 Cal. Rptr. 450·1976 Cal. App. LEXIS 1355·56 Cal. App. 3d 335
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMarch 18, 1976Crim. 27965California949 words

Opinion

Opinion

Hastings, J.

The within petition for a writ of habeas corpus was filed by Jacqueline Pearlmutter on behalf of her husband, Jack Pearlmutter, to secure his release from county jail following his 30-day commitment for contempt of court. We ordered Pearlmutter released on $500 bail and calendared the matter for hearing on January 28, 1976. On that date the court was informed that Pearlmutter was in Yuma, Arizona where he was undergoing psychiatric treatment.

The threshold question before us is whether Pearlmutter’s absence from the jurisdiction at the time of the hearing on the habeas corpus petition precludes our ruling on the merits of the petition. We find that it does not. When a prisoner is admitted to bail pursuant to section 1476 of the Penal Code, the officer who had custody of the prisoner prior to his release is excused from the requirement of producing his body in court. (Matter of Murphy, 154 Cal. 168 [ 97 P. 188 ].) The prisoner who is at large on bail may attend the hearing on the writ petition if he desires, but his attendance is not necessary to confer jurisdiction on the court. For jurisdictional purposes his undertaking or cash deposit is a substitute for his- personal…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.