In Re Armstrong

Good Law
126 Cal. App. 3d 565·178 Cal. Rptr. 902·1981 Cal. App. LEXIS 2444
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaDecember 8, 1981Crim. 22659California3,145 words

Opinion

Opinion

Elkington, J.

On the habeas corpus petition of Antonio Francois Armstrong we consider the constitutionality of a practice of some municipal courts not to record verbatim, although requested by the defendant, the testimony and other oral proceedings of criminal misdemeanor cases by a phonographic reporter, or electronic recording device, or otherwise.

Petitioner Armstrong had been convicted in a municipal court of Alameda County of possession of a switchblade knife. He was sentenced to 30 days in the county jail; the sentence was then suspended and he was placed on probation. He was thereafter arrested on suspicion of stealing money from his employer, a bakery establishment, and probation revocation proceedings were instituted.

Four witnesses testified at the hearing, two for the People and two for Armstrong. The incriminating evidence was entirely circumstantial. Armstrong and several others worked with flour for their bakery employer. The thief had apparently tracked flour markings to the area where the employer’s money was kept. Proof of Armstrong’s guilt depended upon just where the witnesses had placed the markings.

At the probation revocation hearing Armstrong had not requested…

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.