Pulk

People v. Pulk

Good Law
1927 Cal. App. LEXIS 50·87 Cal. App. 733·262 P. 344
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaDecember 21, 1927Docket No. 1568.California577 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Conrey, J.

The defendant, by an information in two counts, was charged with the crime of rape of a twelve year old girl. The counts are alike, except that the dates are different. When the case was called for trial the defendant, who was then represented by counsel, pleaded guilty on the first count and the second count was ordered off the calendar. He made an application for probation. While that application was under consideration the defendant gave notice of motion that he be permitted to withdraw the plea of guilty for the purpose of entering another and different plea. The notice did not state upon what ground the motion would be made, and was not supported by any affidavits. However, the court received oral testimony of several witnesses, and from a reading of that testimony it appears that the principal reason relied upon by defendant’s counsel in claiming that this motion should be granted was that at the time of entering the defendant’s plea of guilty he did not understand that he was pleading guilty to the crime of rape, but thought that he was pleading guilty to the lesser offense of contributing to the delinquency of a minor. The sole ground of appeal now presented is that the…

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.