Nicholson

People v. Nicholson

Good Law
123 Cal. App. 4th 823·20 Cal. Rptr. 3d 476·2004 Cal. App. LEXIS 1824·2004 Daily Journal DAR 13287·2004 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 9718
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaOctober 29, 2004A101106California4,015 words

Opinion

Opinion

Simons, J.

Numerous Penal Code provisions punish those who successfully frustrate an effort to arrest them. Alone among these, the escape statute, section 4532, requires that the defendant be a “prisoner” at the time he or she flees “lawful custody.” In this case, officers lost control over appellant while arresting him, and he fled the scene. In the published portion of this opinion, we address the nature of the crime appellant committed when he fled and conclude that his flight constituted an escape, but only because appellant was a parolee in lawful custody for a parole violation. We also conclude that the court’s instructions defining “escape” and “lawful custody” were deficient, but the errors were nonprejudicial. In the unpublished portion of the opinion, we reject appellant’s other claims of error.

Background

In July 1997, appellant was released from prison on parole following his conviction for attempted murder. On July 21, 1998, parole agent Stephen Armstrong was the “officer of the day” in the Redwood City Parole Office. Based on a telephone call he received that day, Armstrong determined that appellant had violated his parole and recommended to supervising agent Dennis…

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.