McNally, Application of
| Decision Date | 20 September 1956 |
| Docket Number | Cr. 3279 |
| Citation | 144 Cal.App.2d 531,301 P.2d 385 |
| Court | California Court of Appeals Court of Appeals |
| Parties | Application of William J. McNALLY for a Writ of Habeas Corpus. |
William J. McNally, in pro. per.
Edmund G. Brown, Atty. Gen., Clarence A. Linn, Asst. Atty. Gen., Raymond M. Momboisse, Deputy Atty. Gen., for respondent.
Petitioner is an inmate of San Quentin Prison. By this writ of habeas corpus he seeks enforcement of a number of claimed rights. Petitioner alleges that he has been named as defendant in a civil action brought in Los Angeles County, that he applied to the Adult Authority for restoration of his civil rights to the extent of permitting him to engage named counsel for defense of that action, and that such application was denied. None of these allegations is controverted.
with exceptions not material here. Pen.Code, § 2600.
One imprisoned is still liable to be sued, and 'this liability necessarily carries with it the right to defend.' People v. Lawrence, 140 Cal.App.2d 133, 295 P.2d 4, 6. This right is qualified by the rule that the prisoner is not entitled to be personally present at any part of the proceedings. People v. Lawrence, supra; In re Bagwell, 26 Cal.App.2d 418, 420, 79 P.2d 395.
It follows clearly that the prisoner is entitled to representation by counsel in such a civil proceeding. Certainly his right to defend would be wholly illusory if, lacking the right to be present in person, he could also be denied the right to employ counsel. Thus the application for limited restoration of rights should have been granted.
'The writ of habeas corpus has been allowed to one lawfully in custody as a means of enforcing rights to which, in his confinement, he is entitled.' In re Chessman, 44 Cal.2d 1, 9, 279 P.2d 24, 29 and cases cited.
It is therefore ordered that the civil rights of petitioner be and be deemed restored to the limited extent of permitting him to employ counsel to present his defense in the civil action described in his petition.
The other points raised by the petition have been determined adversely to petitioner in other proceedings. People v. McNally, 134 Cal.App.2d...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Payne v. Superior Court
...on the ground that the statute did not provide for notice and an opportunity to be heard. Similarly, the court in In re McNally (1956) 144 Cal.App.2d 531, 300 P.2d 869, ruled that a prisoner was entitled to engage paid counsel, reasoning that a prisoner's liability to be sued necessarily ca......
-
Polk v. Polk, A119043 (Cal. App. 8/26/2009)
...(1955) 44 Cal.2d 1, 9.) This may include enforcing a prisoner's right of reasonable access in an ongoing civil action (In re McNally (1956) 144 Cal.App.2d 531, 532-533), but here, Susan does not seek access to any upcoming hearing or even stress her right of access (as in the appeals). With......
-
United States v. Mensik, Civ. A. No. 69-521.
...8(f); Dioguardi v. Durning, 139 F.2d 774 (2d Cir. 1944); Morgan v. Sylvester, 125 F.Supp. 380, 383 (S.D. N.Y.1954). 3 In re McNally, 144 Cal.App.2d 531, 301 P.2d 385 (1956); State ex rel. Gladden v. Sloper, 209 Or. 346, 306 P.2d 418 4 F.R.Civ.P. 56(c). 5 Following a decision of the Tax Cour......
-
Arnett v. Office of Admin. Hearings
...908, 913, 132 Cal.Rptr. 405, 553 P.2d 565; Wood v. Superior Court (1974) 36 Cal.App.3d 811, 813, 112 Cal.Rptr. 157; In re McNally (1956) 144 Cal.App.2d 531, 532, 301 P.2d 385.) In In re McNally, supra, 144 Cal.App.2d at page 532, 301 P.2d 385, a prisoner sought a limited restoration of righ......