Perez

People v. Perez

Good Law
148 Cal. App. 4th 353·55 Cal. Rptr. 3d 683
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMarch 8, 2007C051800California6,847 words

Opinion

Opinion

This case demonstrates why it is important for the Judicial Council of California to be careful and to pay attention to detail when it promulgates or amends rules of court. In amending a rule regarding the filing in the trial court of a statement of reasonable grounds for appeal following a plea of guilty or nolo contendere in a criminal case, the Judicial Council deleted the rule's express time limit for compliance. Apparently it believed that continuing to include the deadline in the amended rule was unnecessary because other rules, although not directly on point, can be interpreted to compel compliance with the time limit. Unfortunately, the deletion, which itself was unnecessary, created an ambiguity that we now must sort out.

Penal Code section 1237.5, subdivision (a) provides that when a defendant in a criminal proceeding pleads guilty or nolo contendere and then chooses to appeal, the defendant must in some instances file in the superior court a written statement under penalty of perjury "showing reasonable constitutional, jurisdictional, or other grounds going to the legality of the proceedings." We will refer to this statement as a statement of reasonable…

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.