In Re Madrid

Each of the petitioners in these habeas corpus proceedings is presently confined under, a commitment for violation of Penal Code section 209 (kidnaping for the purpose of robbery). A plea of guilty was entered by each: Madrid in 1968, Compton in 1964 and Thomas in 1965. All such pleas resulted from plea bargaining. Each petitioner challenges his conviction in the light of People v. Daniels (1969) 71 Cal.2d 1119, 1139 [ 80 Cal.Rptr. 897 , 459 P.2d 225 ], claiming that his conduct was not within that proscribed by section 209, and that he is entitled to relief under People v. Mutch (1971) 4 Cal.3d 389, 395-396 [ 93 Cal.Rptr. 721 , 482 P.2d 633 ]. The crimes committed by the three petitioners are in no way connected; we have consolidated the matters solely because of the similarity of the legal issues involved.

In Daniels , the California Supreme Court held that the asportation of a victim sufficient to subject the perpetrator of a robbery to the aggravated kidnaping provisions of Penal Code section 209 is not satisfied by compelled movement which, although accompanied by the intent to rob, is only incidental to the robbery and does “not substantially increase the risk of…