Benavidez

I dissent.

This case is but another result of the engulfing mania of some courts to find, or to attempt to find, a so-called newly- *308 born protective constitutional right for the benefit of a properly convicted dangerous criminal with the result that the criminal can be released.

The chronology of the significant events involved in this case is as follows:

As indicated in the majority opinion, this cause was submitted to the trial court by a stipulation of the parties and counsel in open court. The appellant was present and he was represented by counsel at all times during the proceedings in the municipal and trial court.

Although the defendants were charged with other serious offenses (robbery and attempted robbery), the prosecutor elected to proceed upon the murder charge only. Counsel for both sides meticulously and accurately stipulated to what at that time was considered by everybody concerned to be a perfect first degree murder record. It was stipulated, among other things, that the testimony taken at the preliminary hearing would be submitted to the court, that such procedure would be agreeable to all concerned and that the People’s case might be heard upon such…

The judgment of the trial court in this cause made on June 19, 1959, (adjudging defendant guilty of first degree murder) was affirmed by this court in an opinion filed on June 8,1960, (People v. Barreras, et al., Benavidez, Appellant, 181 Cal.App.2d 609 [ 5 Cal.Rptr. 454 ]); appellant’s petition for a hearing by the Supreme Court was denied Augustz 3, 1960. Thereafter, pursuant to decision of the Supreme Court of the United States, the remittitur herein *304 was recalled and the judgment of this court was vacated in order to consider (in the light of Douglas v. California, 372 U.S. 353 [ 83 S.Ct. 814 , 9 L.Ed.2d 811 ]) the matter of appointment of counsel for defendant Benavidez who had appeared in propria persona when this appeal was previously before this court. Thereupon, this court appointed Mr. Robert W. Stanley as counsel for Benavidez. Again the judgment of the trial court was affirmed by this court in an opinion filed December 1, 1964; appellant’s petition for a hearing by the Supreme Court was granted on January 27, 1965, and the cause re-transferred to this court for reconsideration in light of Escobedo v. Illinois, 378 U.S. 478 [ 84 S.Ct. 1758 , 12 L.Ed.2d 977…

The judgment of the trial court in this cause made on June 19, 1959, (adjudging defendant guilty of first degree murder) was affirmed by this court in an opinion filed on June 8, 1960, (People v. Barreras, et al., Benavidez, Appellant, 181 Cal.App.2d 609 [ 5 Cal.Rptr. 454 ]); appellant's petition for a hearing by the Supreme Court was denied August 3, 1960. Thereafter, pursuant to decision of the Supreme Court of the United States, the remittitur herein was recalled and the judgment of this court was vacated in order to consider (in the light of Douglas v. California, 372 U.S. 353 [ 83 S.Ct. 814 , 9 L.Ed.2d 811 ]) the matter of appointment of counsel for defendant Benavidez who had appeared in propria persona when this appeal was previously before this court. Thereupon, this court appointed Mr. Robert W. Stanley as counsel for Benavidez. Again the judgment of the trial court was affirmed by this court in an opinion filed December 1, 1964; appellant's petition for a hearing by the Supreme Court was granted on January 27, 1965, and the cause retransferred to this court for reconsideration in light of Escobedo v. Illinois, 378 U.S. 478 [ 84 S.Ct. 1758 , 12 L.Ed.2d 977…