People v. Superior Court

Good Law
136 Cal. App. 541·1934 Cal. App. LEXIS 1001·28 P.2d 1076
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaFebruary 1, 1934Docket No. 9471.California681 words

Opinion

lead Opinion

Houser, J.

The essential facts herein are that one Jack Coffee having pleaded “guilty” to a charge of petit larceny contained in an information theretofore filed against him in the superior court, and at the same time having admitted the additional fact (also charged against him in said information) that prior to the date on which said offense was committed he had been convicted of a felony and had “served a term therefor in a penal institution”,—on application made by him to the superior court for probation, by an order of said court the said application was granted. Thereupon a petition for a writ of mandate was presented to this court for the purpose of procuring its order by which the superior court may be directed to vacate its said order by which the said defendant was granted probation and thereupon to pronounce judgment upon and against said defendant “according to law”.

In the premises, the power of the superior court depends upon the construction which should be given to sections 667 and 1203 of the Penal Code. The pertinent provisions of the former statute are that “every person who, having been convicted of any felony either in this state or elsewhere, and having served a term…

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.