Gilmore

People v. Gilmore

Good Law
1965 Cal. App. LEXIS 1102·239 Cal. App. 2d 125·48 Cal. Rptr. 449
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaDecember 30, 1965Crim. 10875California3,613 words

Opinion

Opinion

Kingsley, J.

Defendant was charged by indictment with a sale of heroin, in violation of section 11501 of the Health and Safety Code, with four prior felony convictions, two of which were for narcotic violations. He admitted the priors but pled not guilty as to the offense charged. After a trial by jury, he was found guilty. A motion for new trial and probation was denied and a sentence of imprisonment in state prison was imposed. He has appealed from the judgment.

It is not contended that the evidence was insufficient to support the verdict, nor that there were any errors at the trial stage which would impel a reversal. The contention made here is that defendant was denied due process of law in that: (1) there was an undue delay between the date of the offense charged and the date of his arrest, and (2) that he was unconstitutionally deprived of his right to interview and (had he so desired) to subpoena a police informer. In support of these contentions, which were duly and vigorously urged in the trial court, extensive discovery proceedings were held and the transcript of those proceedings is before us as part of the record on appeal.

We summarize the events which are thus presented to us…

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.