O'Neil

Petitioner seeks relief under rule 31(a) of the California Rules of Court from his default in failing to file his notice of appeal within 10 days from the date of judgment as required by rule 31(a).

In his petition for a hearing in this court petitioner asserted that, during the vital 10-day period, he had told his attorney, the public defender, that he desired to appeal, and asked the attorney to appeal or to tell him how to do so; that the attorney did neither. It was also averred that after the date of judgment and while he was still in the county jail (presumably within the 10-day period), he wrote out a notice of appeal, placed it in the mail slot, saw the jail attendant pick it up, and he believed it had been picked up for mailing. These facts, if true, and if seasonably urged, would have entitled petitioner to the relief requested. (People v. Diehl, 62 Cal.2d 114 [ 41 Cal.Rptr. 281 , 396 P.2d 697 ]; People v. Madrid, 62 Cal.2d 602 [ 43 Cal.Rptr. 638 , 400 P.2d 750 ]; People v. Collier, 62 Cal.2d 543 [ 43 Cal.Rptr. 1 , 399 P.2d 569 ]; In re Gonsalves, 48 Cal.2d 638 [ 311 P.2d 483 ].) To ascertain the truth of these alleged facts we appointed the Honorable Warren Steel,…