Franklin
People v. Franklin
Opinion
Lead Opinion
Chipman, J.
Defendant was informed against by the district attorney ■ of San Joaquin County for the crime of selling and furnishing morphine, and having suffered two prior convictions for like crimes and punishable under the same statute. The defendant moved the court for a new trial, which was granted, and the people thereupon took an appeal from the order.
The minute order made by the court following the motion reads as, follows: ‘ ‘ Thereupon the court made an order granting defendant’s motion for a new trial upon the ground that the defendant had not been properly arraigned in that said defendant had not been asked whether or not she had suffered the prior convictions charged against her in the information and had not specifically entered her plea thereto, and that the jury did- not find specifically on the charge of the prior convictions. ’ ’ '
The minute entry made at the arraignment of defendant reads as follows: ‘1 The defendant waived time allowed by the statute before answering the information, and upon being asked by the court whether she pleads ‘guilty’ or ‘not guilty’ to the offense charged in the information, the defendant in person pleads that she is not guilty.” Thereupon…