People v. Rose
| Decision Date | 08 June 1959 |
| Docket Number | Cr. 3587 |
| Citation | 339 P.2d 954,171 Cal.App.2d 171 |
| Court | California Court of Appeals Court of Appeals |
| Parties | PEOPLE of the State of California, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. Glenn ROSE, Defendant and Appellant. |
Glenn Rose, San Quentin, in pro. per.
Gartner S. Thomas, Albany, for appellant.
Stanley Mosk, Atty. Gen., Clarence A. Linn, Asst. Atty. Gen., Peter T. Kennedy, Deputy Atty. Gen., for respondent.
Defendant pleaded guilty to charges of kidnapping (Pen.Code, § 207) and assault by means of force likely to produce great bodily injury (Pen.Code, § 245). A third count charging violation of Penal Code Section 288a was dismissed, request for probation was denied, and defendant was sentenced to prison. He appeals.
Judgment on a plea of guilty is not appealable on the merits. Stephens v. Toomey, 51 Cal.2d 864, 338 P.2d 182. If a motion is made in the trial court to vacate the judgment and withdraw the plea of guilty, such motion may be treated as an application for writ of error coram nobis, denial of which can be reviewed on appeal. People v. Grgurevich, 153 Cal.App.2d 806, 810, 315 P.2d 391; People v. Adams, 100 Cal.App.2d 841, 842, 224 P.2d 873. But defendant, although represented by counsel of his own choice throughout the proceedings in the trial court, failed to make any motion either to withdraw the plea or to vacate the judgment.
Defendant filed his notice of appeal and his briefs in this court in propria persona. Thus, even though the attorney who represented him in the trial court appeared at oral argument and filed a brief supplemental to those prepared by appellant himself, we extend this opinion briefly to point out that, on the merits, the appeal is groundless. Appellant's contention is based wholly on the claim that he pleaded guilty only on the assurance of his attorney that he 'would positively be given probation.' But assurances of a defendant's own attorney are not sufficient to vitiate a plea of guilty. In re Atchley, 48 Cal.2d 408, 418, 310 P.2d 15; People v. Butler, 70 Cal.App.2d 553, 562, 161 P.2d 401. Such representations can avail a defendant only when there is an apparent corroboration of them by the acts or statements of a responsible state officer. People v. Gilbert, 25 Cal.2d 422, 443, 154 P.2d 657. Even if this proceeding be deemed an original application in the nature of coram nobis, and the briefs be considered as affidavits, they fail to show the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Gardella v. Field
...misrepresentation or coercion). People v. McDowell, 204 Cal.App.2d 734, 736, 22 Cal.Rptr. 646 (plea obtained by duress); People v. Rose, 171 Cal.App.2d 171, 339 P.2d 954 (plea obtained by misrepresentation). Also see People v. Rosalez, 201 Cal.App.2d 643, 20 Cal.Rptr. 80 (1962).8 Consequent......
-
People v. Ribero
...(People v. Natividad (1963) 222 Cal.App.2d 438, 441, 35 Cal.Rptr. 237), a plea obtained by misrepresentation (People v. Rose (1959) 171 Cal.App.2d 171, 172, 339 P.2d 954), or other abuse of discretion in denying a motion to withdraw a guilty plea. (People v. Francis (1954) 42 Cal.2d 335, 33......
-
People v. Jolke
...185 Cal.App.2d 507, 508, 8 Cal.Rptr. 319; People v. Kelly (1960) 184 Cal.App.2d 611, 612--615, 7 Cal.Rptr. 600; People v. Rose (1959) 171 Cal.App.2d 171, 172, 339 P.2d 954; People v. Loeber (1958) 158 Cal.App.2d 730, 733--734, 323 P.2d If it be assumed that the court erred in not exercising......
-
People v. Devaughn
...induced to enter such pleas. (See People v. Ribero, supra, 4 Cal.3d 55, 63, 92 Cal.Rptr. 692, 480 P.2d 308; People v. Rose (1959) 171 Cal.App.2d 171, 172, 339 P.2d 954.) We conclude that the judgments must be reversed because defendants' pleas were induced by misrepresentations of a fundame......