In re Tucker

Good Law
1966 Cal. LEXIS 228·48 Cal. Rptr. 697·64 Cal. 2d 15·409 P.2d 921
Supreme Court of CaliforniaJanuary 26, 1966Crim. No. 8251California2,578 words

Opinion

lead Opinion

Peek, J.

By his application for the writ of habeas corpus Forrest S. Tucker, an inmate of Folsom Prison, seeks relief from the determination that he is an habitual criminal within the terms of subdivision (a) of section 644 of the Penal Code. He also challenges the quality of the representation afforded him by court-appointed counsel on appeal and urges that we recall the remittitur and reinstate his appeal.

The certified abstract of judgment reveals that on November 27, 1953, a judgment of multiple convictions pursuant to jury verdicts was entered against petitioner for four counts of first-degree robbery; that two charged prior felony convictions were found to be true; and that petitioner was thereupon adjudged to be an habitual criminal within the meaning of subdivision (a) of section 644 of the Penal Code. 1

The priors charged and proved were (1) grand larceny in Florida in 1938, and (2) burglary in Louisiana in 1946. For each of these convictions a term was served in state prison.

As in the case of In re Woods, ante, p. 3, [ 48 Cal.Rptr. 689 , 409 P.2d 913 ], decided this day, petitioner collaterally attacks each of the two prior convictions on the ground that he neither was…

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.