Brekke

People v. Brekke

Good Law
1967 Cal. App. LEXIS 2147·250 Cal. App. 2d 651·58 Cal. Rptr. 854
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMay 3, 1967Crim. 4086California4,132 words

Opinion

Opinion

Van Dyke, J.

An indictment was filed charging appellant with the murder of Julius Micheletti. Appellant entered pleas of not guilty and not guilty by reason of insanity. A jury found appellant guilty of murder in the second degree and determined that he was sane at the time the offense was committed. Appellant now appeals from the judgment entered.

On appeal two principal contentions of appellant are that the court erred in allowing the prosecution to call two psychiatrists to testify to appellant’s state of mind at both the guilt and sanity phases of trial when appellant’s constitutional rights had not been fully protected as required by the Dorado and Escobedo cases. A third contention is that it was error to allow a third psychiatrist (court-appointed) to testify on sanity.

There is no substantial conflict in the facts elicited at the trial.

Appellant, 16 years of age, was brought to the Sacramento County Juvenile Center at approximately 11:20 a.m. on August 19, 1964. He was taken to Unit F in the center after a short talk with the intake officer, who explained to appellant that the following day there would be a detention hearing, at which time the judge would determine whether…

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.