Zackery

People v. Zackery

Good Law
146 Cal. App. 4th 122·52 Cal. Rptr. 3d 736
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaDecember 27, 2006C051431California6,718 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Sims, J.

[EDITORS' NOTE: TEXT NOT CERTIFIED FOR PUBLICATION APPEARS WITH GRAY BACKGROUND BELOW.] [EDITORS' NOTE: THIS PAGE CONTAINS HEADNOTES. HEADNOTES ARE NOT AN OFFICIAL PRODUCT OF THE COURT, THEREFORE THEY ARE NOT DISPLAYED.]

In this case, we discuss the obligation of a trial court clerk to accurately record the sentence pronounced by the judge in a criminal proceeding. Here, the court clerk included in the minutes and the abstract of judgment some provisions that were not in the judge's pronouncement of sentence. This was error, which was compounded by the fact the judge erroneously sentenced defendant on a count for which he was not convicted. We also shall address the judge's remark, on the record and in open court, that this court is a "kangaroo court."

In the unpublished part of our opinion, we conclude that the question whether the judge coerced defendant into pleading guilty must be raised via a petition for writ of habeas corpus because the judge denied defendant's request for a certificate of probable cause. (Pen. Code, § 1237.5 .)

For present purposes, this case began in this court when counsel appointed for defendant filed an opening brief that set forth the facts of…

Concurring Opinion

Hull, J.

I concur in parts I through V of the majority opinion. As to part VI, I agree the trial judge's comment was a violation of canon 1 of the California Code of Judicial Ethics. *Page 136

Opinion

Certified for Partial Publication. [*]

In this case, we discuss the obligation of a trial court clerk to accurately record the sentence pronounced by the judge in a criminal proceeding. Here, the court clerk included in the minutes and the abstract of judgment some provisions that were not in the judge's pronouncement of sentence. This was error, which was compounded by the fact the judge erroneously sentenced defendant on a count for which he was not convicted. We also shall address the judge's remark, on the record and in open court, that this court is a "kangaroo court."

In the unpublished part of our opinion, we conclude that the question whether the judge coerced defendant into pleading guilty must be raised via a petition for writ of habeas corpus because the judge denied defendant's request for a certificate of probable cause. (Pen.Code, § 1237.5.) [1]

For present purposes, this case began in this court when counsel appointed for defendant filed an opening brief that set forth the facts of the case, informed this court he found no arguable issues in favor of defendant, and requested this court to review the record and determine whether there were any arguable…

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.