Isaac

John K. Van de Kamp, District Attorney, Donald J. Kaplan and Richard W. Gerry, Deputy District Attorneys, for Real Party in Interest.

OPINION

ASHBY, J.

Petitioner seeks a writ of mandate to compel respondent court to grant petitioner's demurrer (Pen. Code, § 1004) to count I of a pending information, on the grounds the information fails to state a public offense and fails to comply with Penal Code sections 950-952. We issued an alternative writ and temporarily stayed the proceedings.

Count I of the information charges petitioner with "ATTEMPTED EXTORTION, in violation of Section 664/518, Penal Code," in that on or about May 12, 1976, she "did willfully and unlawfully attempt to obtain an official act of a public officer, to wit, Chief of Police, by the wrongful use of force or fear." The preliminary hearing evidence indicates that petitioner sent a letter to the Chief of Police of the City of Los Angeles threatening him with bodily harm if he did not release William and Emily Harris, two individuals then in custody.

The relevant provisions of the Penal Code regarding the crime of extortion are contained in part 1, title 13, chapter 7 (§§ 518-527). Penal Code section 518…

*262 Opinion

Petitioner seeks a writ of mandate to compel respondent court to grant petitioner’s demurrer (Pen. Code, § 1004) to count I of a pending information, on the grounds the information fails to state a public offense and fails to comply with Penal Code sections 950-952. We issued an alternative writ and temporarily stayed the proceedings.

Count I of the information charges petitioner with “Attempted Extortion, in violation of Section 664/518, Penal Code,” in that on or about May 12, 1976, she “did willfully and unlawfully attempt to obtain an official act of a public officer, to wit, Chief of Police, by the wrongful use of force or fear.” The preliminary hearing evidence indicates that petitioner sent a letter to the Chief of Police of the City of Los Angeles threatening him with bodily harm if he did not release William and Emily Harris, two individuals then in custody.

The relevant provisions of the Penal Code regarding the crime of extortion are contained in part 1, title 13, chapter 7 (§§ 518-527). Penal Code section 518 provides: “Extortion is the obtaining of property from another, with his consent, or the obtaining of an official act of a public officer, induced…

I dissent. There are limits to our power to cure legislative oversights. The majority’s transplant of the words “the obtaining of an official act of a public officer,” into section 524 of the Penal Code and, by implication, into sections 520 and 523, goes too far. The cases cited —People v. Barksdale (1972) 8 Cal.3d 320, 334 [ 105 Cal.Rptr. 1 , 503 P.2d 257 ], People v. Carroll (1970) 1 Cal.3d 581, 584 [ 83 Cal.Rptr. 176 , 463 P.2d 400 ] and People v. Medina (1971) 15 Cal.App.3d 845 [ 93 Cal.Rptr. 560 ]—do not help. Barksdale involved an interpretation of section 25953 of the Health and Safety Code which provided, with respect to therapeutic abortions that “[i]n no event shall the termination be *265 approved after the 20th week of pregnancy.” The Supreme Court interpreted this language to mean that the abortion itself had to be performed within 20 weeks of the time of conception. 1 Carroll involved a contention that the enhanced punishment for great bodily injury inflicted “in the course of commission of the robbery . . .” (Pen. Code, § 213) applied only if the robbery was still in progress. The Supreme Court held that the purpose of the legislation-Aleterrence of robbers from…