Malins

The portion of Welfare and Institutions Code section 3108 pertinent to this case reads: “If the person so committed ... is dissatisfied with the order of commitment, he may within 10 days after the making of such order, file a written demand that the question of his addiction or imminent danger of addiction be tried by a jury in the superior court of the county in which he was committed. Thereupon, the court shall cause a jury to- be summoned and to be in attendance at a date stated, not less than 4 days nor more than 30 days from the date of the demand for a jury trial.” This- is a statutory right which comes into play only when the person ordered committed chooses to request it. (People v. Murphy (1969) 70 Cal.2d 109, 117, 119 [ 74 Cal.Rptr. 65 , 448 P.2d 945 ].) It is, therefore, something in the nature of a lateral appeal to a new trier of fact. It is not an, initial judicial determination of facts. The second sentence from section, 3108 quoted above has been held to mean, that the jury trial must be held within 30 days (People v. Murphy, supra, 70 Cal.2d 109, 118, fn. 7 ), subject (I would add) to exception where good legal cause is shown. I would construe this time…

A petition to commit the appellant as a drug addict was filed by the district attorney under the provisions of Welfare and Institutions Code section 3100.6. 1 The public defender was appointed to defend appellant, and an order setting time and place for hearing for commitment, as well as an order for appearance, were served on him. At the time of the hearing (in Dept. 95-A, superior court), appellant was represented by privately retained counsel. Appellant’s motion to dismiss the petition was denied following the court’s finding that there was probable cause for taking appellant into custody. Appellant was found to be a narcotic drug addict and was committed to 1 the California Rehabilitation Center at Corona for placement as provided by law. 2 (Welf. & Inst. Code, § 3106.5.) A written request for a jury trial was filed by appellant, and the execution of the commitment order was stayed pending the outcome of the jury trial. (Welf. & Inst. Code, § 3108.) At the time of setting of the jury trial, the judge stated: “This matter is set for trial on September 3rd, a Thursday, *815 at 9 a.m. in Department 1. Mr. Malins, you are ordered to return to the courthouse, First and…

A petition to commit the appellant as a drug addict was filed by the district attorney under the provisions of Welfare and Institutions Code section 3100.6. [1] The public defender was appointed to defend appellant, and an order setting time and place for hearing for commitment, as well as an order for appearance, were served on him. At the time of the hearing (in Dept. 95-A, superior court), appellant was represented by privately retained counsel. Appellant's motion to dismiss the petition was denied following the court's finding that there was probable cause for taking appellant into custody. Appellant was found to be a narcotic drug addict and was committed to the California Rehabilitation Center at Corona for placement as provided by law. [2] (Welf. & Inst. Code, § 3106.5.) A written request for a jury trial was filed by appellant, and the execution of the commitment order was stayed pending the outcome of the jury trial. (Welf. & Inst. Code, § 3108.) At the time of setting of the jury trial, the judge stated: "This matter is set for trial on September 3rd, a Thursday, at 9 a.m. in Department 1. Mr. Malins, you are ordered to return to the courthouse,…