Tirado

People v. Tirado

Caution
151 Cal. App. 3d 341·198 Cal. Rptr. 682·1984 Cal. App. LEXIS 1552
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJanuary 26, 1984Docket Nos. 15210, 15556California4,982 words

Opinion

Opinion

Staniforth, J.

On this consolidated petition for writ of habeas corpus and appeal, defendant Francisco Javier Tirado contends his plea of guilty to robbery of a Chula Vista shoe store is void and violates due process because it was the result of presumptive as well as actual vindictive prosecution. Tirado also asserts he was rendered ineffective assistance of counsel due to his attorney’s (1) failure to raise the meritorious defenses of presumptive and actual vindictive prosecution and (2) failure to seek dismissal of the robbery charges on the grounds (a) the prosecution’s failure to join these charges with other robbery charges constituted a bar to Tirado’s prosecution for the shoe store robbery and (b) Tirado’s speedy trial rights were violated as a result of prosecutorial delay in charging him with the shoe store robbery. We find no merit in any of these claims and affirm Tirado’s conviction and sentence.

Facts

In an information filed June 24, 1982, Tirado was charged with the November 4, 1980, robbery (Pen. Code, § 211) of a Chula Vista shoe store (CRS 58798), burglary (§ 459) , and two counts of assault with a deadly weapon (§ 245, subd. (a)). As to each count it was further…

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.