In Re Mirando

Good Law
15 Cal. App. 2d 443·1936 Cal. App. LEXIS 77·59 P.2d 544
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJuly 14, 1936Crim. 1514California479 words

Opinion

Opinion

Thompson, J.

On habeas corpus the petitioner asserts that he is illegally restrained of his liberty because the City Court of the City of Vacaville, Solano County, was without jurisdiction to try or sentence him under the provisions of section 502 of the California Vehicle Code for the reason that he had been previously convicted of a similar offense in another inferior court, which former conviction fixed his penalty in the last case at imprisonment in the county jail-“for not less than ninety days nor more than one year”, and under the provisions of section 1425, subdivision 2:

The entire record of the city court is before us, including the docket, the commitment and the minutes of the trial of the petitioner. The complaint merely charges the accused under the provisions of section 502 of the California Vehicle Code with driving a vehicle on the public highway while he was “under the influence of intoxicating liquor”. The defendant pleaded guilty, waived time for pronouncing judgment and was sentenced to imprisonment in the county jail of Solano County for a period of 30 days. The record fails to show that the petitioner was ever previously convicted of a similar offense or of any other…

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.