Hofmann, Application of
| Decision Date | 23 March 1955 |
| Docket Number | Cr. 5397 |
| Citation | 131 Cal.App.2d 758,281 P.2d 96 |
| Court | California Court of Appeals Court of Appeals |
| Parties | Application of Betty Short HOFMANN, For a Writ of Habeas Corpus. |
Gordon W. Levoy and Leonard F. Herzog, Hollywood, for petitioner.
Harold W. Kennedy, County Counsel, Los Angeles, Richard L. Riemer, Deputy County Counsel, Culver City, for respondent.
Upon petition of one of the attorneys for Betty Short Hofmann representing that the latter is confined at Kimball Sanitarium in Los Angeles County as a mental patient under an order of commitment of the Superior Court, we issued a writ of habeas corpus to which return has been filed and upon which a hearing has been held. We conclude that the petitioner should be ordered released because of irregularities in the proceedings leading up to her commitment. Pertinent provisions of § 5050, Welf. & Inst. Code, are set out in the margin. 1 The proceedings may be outlined as follows. The son of petitioner filed an affidavit which set forth facts sufficient to warrant examination into the mental health and condition of the patient but failed to allege any facts showing necessity for the immediate apprehension of his mother, that is to say, no facts were alleged from which it would appear that the condition of Mrs. Hofmann was such that she was likely to injure herself or others if not placed under restraint. At the same time there was presented certificate of a physician that he had several times examined Mrs. Hofmann, the last time on February 4, and which stated: 'It is my impression that she is in a state of paranoid reaction and that she should be observed in Psychiatric Unit No. 3 LACGH.' Upon the basis of the affidavit and the certificate an order was made by a judge of the superior court which recited that Mrs. Hofmann was likely to injure herself or others if not immediately hospitalized and detained and which commanded that she be forthwith apprehended and detained for examination and hearing, pending the further order of the court. Mrs. Hofmann was taken from her home and immediately placed in the Psychiatric Unit of County General Hospital where she remained until February 9 when she was committed by order of court to the care and custody of the Counselor of Mental Health to be placed in Kimball Sanitarium, there to remain under the supervision of the Counselor of Mental Health until further order of the court. The order for the examination and detention of Mrs. Hofmann was on a printed form consisting of an entire page of closely typed material comprising several paragraphs and it contained what purported to be a notice to the person involved of a right to a hearing, to produce witnesses and to be represented by counsel. The printed form was designed to be used in a number of different situations and if read as a whole it would be meaningless. If care was taken to delete the paragraphs and other statements inappropriate to the proceeding in hand, it could constitute an intelligible notice to the person addressed. Likewise, the notice of hearing and of the right to be represented by counsel, the latter of which is in small print at the bottom of the notice, would, if read by a person of intelligence and understanding, be sufficient to advise him of his rights. However, portions of the writing were stricken out by heavy pencil lines in a manner which rendered it impossible to determine what was intended to be stricken and what to be retained. The portion containing the statement as to the right to notice, right to produce witnesses and to be represented by counsel was so emasculated that it might well indicate that the whole thereof was intended to be stricken and rendered ineffective.
In no other manner nor at any other time was any attempt made to inform Mrs. Hofmann of her right to counsel. It appears from her affidavit attached to the petition that upon numerous occasions she requested of hospital attendants that she be given an opportunity to communicate with her attorneys; no attention was paid to these requests and she was unable to communicate with them.
On February 7 an order was made fixing 9:30 a. m., February 9, 1955, for hearing and examination in department 54 of the court in the General Hospital and Mrs. Hofmann received notice thereof. At the time set for the hearing Mrs. Hofmann was in a room which had been assigned to her. There appeared at her room a judge of the superior court, two physicians, a person identified as a mental health counselor, the husband and son of Mrs. Hofmann. It was not announced that a hearing was to take place. No witnesses were then sworn; statements of two physicians were received and taken...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
People v. Succop
... ... 509, 392 P.2d 269; In re Raner (1963) 59 Cal.2d 635, 30 Cal.Rptr. 814, 381 P.2d 638), insanity (In re Hofmann (1955) 131 Cal.App.2d 758, 281 P.2d 96), inebriacy (In re Wright (1939) 31 Cal.App.2d 166, 88 P.2d 186), intemperate use of stimulants (In re Crowley ... ...
-
People v. Mord
...Third, the cases appellant points to as authority for dismissal and release are all factually distinguishable. In re Hofmann (1955) 131 Cal.App.2d 758, 281 P.2d 96, In re Jones (1964) 61 Cal.2d 325, 38 Cal.Rptr. 509, 392 P.2d 269 (cert. den. 379 U.S. 980, 85 S.Ct. 684, 13 L.Ed.2d 570), and ......
-
Raner, In re
... ... SCHAUER, Justice ... This matter is before us on an order to show cause issued upon an application for writ of habeas corpus filed in propria persona by petitioner James G. Raner, who is confined as a narcotics addict for treatment in the ... 5 In In re Hofmann (1955) 131 Cal.App.2d 758, 281 P.2d 96, a person committed under that law was ordered released on habeas corpus on the ground, among others, of an ... ...
-
Culbertson v. Santa Clara County
...by service of the required documents) is essential to a valid detention order in a mental illness proceeding (see In re Hofmann, 131 Cal.App.2d 758, 281 P.2d 96). Hofmann was a proceeding in habeas corpus. Respondent seeks to distinguish it upon the rule that discharge from a criminal commi......