People v. Hedgecock, s. D004000
| Court | United States State Supreme Court (California) |
| Citation | 250 Cal.Rptr. 268,758 P.2d 596 |
| Decision Date | 19 August 1988 |
| Docket Number | Nos. D004000,D005661 and S005882,s. D004000 |
| Parties | PEOPLE, Respondent, v. Roger HEDGECOCK, Appellant. In re Roger HEDGECOCK on Habeas Corpus. |
Page 268
v.
Roger HEDGECOCK, Appellant.
In re Roger HEDGECOCK on Habeas Corpus.
In Bank.
Prior report: Cal.App., 247 Cal.Rptr. 404.
Appellant's petition for review GRANTED.
Respondent's petition for review GRANTED.
Briefing and oral argument should be limited to the following issues:
I. (A) Is the materiality element of the crime of perjury a legal question for the court or a factual question for the jury?
(B) Does removal of the materiality question from the jury amount to error under People v. Figueroa (1986) 41 Cal.3d 714, 224 Cal.Rptr. 719, 715 P.2d 680?
(C) Should the principles expressed in People v. Figueroa (1986) 41 Cal.3d 714, 224 Cal.Rptr. 719, 715 P.2d 680 be applied retroactively to this case?
II. (A) Is it an abuse of discretion to deny an evidentiary hearing when a defendant in a criminal case moves for a new trial based on juror declarations showing bailiff misconduct during deliberations?
(B) What is the proper scope of such an evidentiary hearing?
(C) May the jurors be compelled to testify at such a hearing?
LUCAS, C.J., and MOSK, PANELLI, ARGUELLES, EAGLESON and KAUFMAN, JJ., concur.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
US v. Taylor, CR-88-0140 EFL.
...In the very recent case of People v. Hedgecock, 201 Cal.App.3d 174, 221-23, 247 Cal.Rptr. 404 (1988), petition for review granted 250 Cal.Rptr. 268, 758 P.2d 596 (1988), the California Court of Appeal viewed Figueroa's rationale as compelling the conclusion that materiality in a state perju......
-
State ex rel. Porter v. Recht, 30439.
...the prosecution need not prove each false statement as proof of any one or more is sufficient"), superseded on other grounds, 250 Cal.Rptr. 268, 758 P.2d 596 (Cal.1988); see generally 60A Am. Jur.2d Perjury § 60 (2nd...
-
Webster v. Superior Court, S001335
...250 Cal.Rptr. 268 46 Cal.3d 338, 758 P.2d 596 Robert L. WEBSTER, Jr., et al., Petitioners, v. The SUPERIOR COURT of Los Angeles County, Respondent; Roxani E. GILLESPIE, as Insurance Commissioner, etc., et al., Real Parties in Interest. No. S001335. Supreme Court of California. Aug. 22, 1988......