Schultz

People v. Schultz

Good Law
1965 Cal. App. LEXIS 1201·238 Cal. App. 2d 804·48 Cal. Rptr. 328
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaDecember 17, 1965Crim. 5113California4,172 words

Opinion

Opinion

Molinari, J.

On this appeal from the judgment of conviction for violating Penal Code section 266 (pandering), defendant, Lori Schultz (also known as Shirley Schultz), raises a number of issues. The facts pertinent to each of these issues will be discussed in our consideration of the separate issues.

The Jurisdiction of the Court at the Time of Judgment to Correct the Error Which it Made in Previously Stating That it Found Defendant Guilty of Violating Section 266h Instead of Section 266i

By grand jury indictment defendant and Gilbert Schultz were charged with three felonies: Count one of the indictment contained a charge of conspiracy (violation of § 182), count two a charge of pandering (violation of § 266i), and count three a charge of pimping (violation of § 266h). Trial by jury was waived and the matter was heard before the court without a jury. At the conclusion of the trial the court indicated that it found Gilbert Schultz not guilty on all counts. It then stated that as to defendant “there could be no guilt as to the pimping charge under the evidence. . . . So, that leaves only the pandering charge. ’ ’ Subsequently, at the continued hearing, after argument by the attorneys, the court…

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.