Bielicki

Bielicki v. Superior Court

Good Law
1962 Cal. LEXIS 206·21 Cal. Rptr. 552·57 Cal. 2d 602·371 P.2d 288
Supreme Court of CaliforniaMay 10, 1962L. A. No. 26693California2,525 words

Opinion

lead Opinion

Schauer, J.

Petitioners seek prohibition to restrain respondent superior court from proceeding to trial on an information charging them with violation of section 286 of the Penal Code (the infamous crime against nature).

Timely motion was made at the preliminary examination to exclude all of the evidence offered by the State on the ground that it had been obtained by an illegal search and seizure in violation of the constitutional guarantees (U.S. Const., 4th and 14th Amends.; Cal. Const., art. I, § 19). The motion was denied and petitioners were held to answer. Petitioners then moved in the superior court to set aside the information for lack of reasonable or probable cause (Pen. Code, § 995) in that their commitment was based entirely upon inadmissible evidence. The motion was denied. We have concluded that on the particular facts of this case the challenged evidence was inadmissible and hence that the peremptory writ should issue.

The sole witness at the preliminary examination was Officer Hetzel of the Long Beach Police Department’s vice squad. Officer Hetzel testified in substance to the following facts: The Pike Corporation, owner of an amusement park in the City of Long Beach, had…

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.