Pearce

People v. Pearce

Good Law
1970 Cal. App. LEXIS 2113·8 Cal. App. 3d 984·87 Cal. Rptr. 814
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJune 19, 1970Crim. 16816California1,648 words

Opinion

Opinion

Stephens, J.

After being charged by indictment, defendant was found guilty of possession of marijuana (Health & Saf. Code, § 11530) and sale of heroin (Health & Saf. Code, § 11501). He appeals from the judgment.

No recitation of the facts is required here, for there is no contention of insufficiency of the evidence, or other question raised necessitating reference to them. The contention on appeal is that “Proceeding by Indictment is Unconstitutional. ”

The Fifth Amendment of the United States Constitution provides in part that no person shall be held to answer for a capital or otherwise infamous crime unless on a presentment or indictment by a grand jury. The due process of such a method of accusation has been approved. (Smith v. United States, 360 U.S. 1 [ 3 L.Ed.2d 1041 , 79 S.Ct. 991 ].) Article 1, section 8 of the California Constitution provides in part that “Offenses heretofore required to be prosecuted by indictment shall be prosecuted by information, after examination and commitment by a magistrate, or by indictment, with or without such examination and commitment, as may be prescribed by law.”

While prosecution by way of information after a preliminary hearing has been…

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.