In re Juarez

Stephen R. Juarez was convicted, after trial by jury, of robbery (Pen. Code, § 211), which was found by the jury to be in . the first *66 degree. In addition, the jury found that Juarez did use a firearm, to wit, a pistol, in the perpetration of the robbery. Juarez’s conviction was affirmed on appeal. (Dist. 2, Div. 2, Crim. 23847.)

Juarez, by his petition for habeas corpus, challenges the legality of his detention for the enhanced punishment imposed for using a firearm in the perpetration of the robbery (Pen. Code, § 12022.5), because of the absence of an oral pronouncement by the sentencing judge imposing the enhanced punishment.

The issue raised here could have been raised on appeal. Generally, habeas corpus will not lie as a substitute for an appeal or as a second appeal. (In re Terry (1971) 4 Cal.3d 911 [ 95 Cal.Rptr. 31 , 484 P.2d 1375 ]; In re Antazo (1970) 3 Cal.3d 100 [ 89 Cal.Rptr. 255 , 473 P.2d 999 ].) This court may, however, if there are special circumstances, consider on petition for habeas corpus matters that do not require a determination of fact although they could have been raised on appeal. (In re Wallace (1970) 3 Cal.3d 289 [ 90 Cal.Rptr. 176 , 475…