People v. Ward, Cr. 10714

• Court: United States State Supreme Court (California)
• Writing for the Court: MOSK; TRAYNOR
• Citation: 426 P.2d 881,66 Cal.2d 571,58 Cal.Rptr. 313
• Parties: , 426 P.2d 881 The PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. John Clarence WARD, Defendant and Appellant. In Bank
• Decision Date: 28 April 1967
• Docket Number: Cr. 10714

Page 313

58 Cal.Rptr. 313 66 Cal.2d 571, 426 P.2d 881 The PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent,
v.
John Clarence WARD, Defendant and Appellant. Cr. 10714. Supreme Court of California, In Bank. April 28, 1967.

[66 Cal.2d 572] John Clarence Ward, in pro. per., and Don Edgar Burris, Los Angeles, under appointment by the Supreme Court, for defendant and appellant.

Thomas C. Lynch, Atty. Gen., and William E. James, Asst. Atty. Gen., for plaintiff and respondent.

MOSK, Justice.

Defendant, John Clarence Ward, pleaded guilty to an information charging him with murder, in violation of section 187 of the Penal Code. ¹ The degree of the crime was not specified in the information or in the plea. The trial court sitting without a jury proceeded to determine the degree of the crime ² and the punishment to be imposed. The court found the killing to be of the first degree, and it imposed punishment of life imprisonment.

Defendant filed a notice of appeal, and thereafter the prosecution moved to dismiss the appeal on the ground of failure to comply with section 1237.5 of the Penal Code. The motion to dismiss was granted

Page 314

[426 P.2d 882] by the Court of Appeal, and the sole question for our determination is whether the requirements of section 1237.5 are applicable where a defendant, after a plea of guilty, does not attack the validity of his guilty plea but merely asserts that errors were committed in the proceedings [66 Cal.2d 573] held subsequently to determine the degree of his crime. ³

Section 1237.5 of the Penal Code provides: 'No appeal shall be taken by defendant from a judgment of conviction upon a plea of guilty or nolo contendere, except where: (a) The defendant has filed with the trial court a written statement, executed under oath or penalty of perjury showing reasonable constitutional, jurisdictional, or other grounds going to the legality of the proceedings; and (b) The trial court has executed and filed a certificate of probable cause for such appeal with the county clerk.'

The information charging defendant with murder in violation of section 187 was filed on March 29, 1965. He initially pleaded not guilty but, on November 8, 1965, he personally withdrew this plea and entered a plea of "Guilty' to Murder (187 Penal Code).' He waived a trial by jury as to the degree of the crime and stipulated that the trial court could, in making its determination, consider certain evidence in addition to the testimony to be taken on the issue of degree. This proceeding lasted for six days, and at its conclusion the court found that, although defendant was intoxicated at the time the crime was committed, he had sufficient mental capacity to form the specific intent to kill with premeditation and deliberation, and it found the murder to be of the first degree. Defendant waived a jury trial on the penalty issue, stipulated to the evidence which could be considered thereon, and the court fixed the punishment at life imprisonment.

Defendant filed a timely notice of appeal from the ensuing judgment but did not, within the time prescribed by rule 31(d) of the California Rules of Court, file the certificate specified in section 1237.5. ⁴ On October 25, 1966, the prosecution[66 Cal.2d 574] moved to dismiss the appeal on the ground that defendant was appealing from a judgment on a plea of guilty and had failed to comply with the requirements of section 1237.5, and the motion was granted.

We conclude that defendant was not required to comply with the provisions of section 1237.5 where, as here, he is not attempting to challenge the validity of his plea of guilty but is asserting only that errors occurred in the subsequent adversary hearings conducted by the trial court for

Page 315

[426 P.2d 883] the purpose of determining the degree of the crime and the penalty to be imposed.

The information charged that defendant was guilty of murder in violation of section 187 of the Penal Code, and his plea of guilty was confined to a violation of that statute. A guilty plea amounts to an admission of every element of the crime and is the equivalent of a conviction. (People v. Jones (1959) 52 Cal.2d 636, 651, 343 P.2d 577.) Thus defendant conceded by his plea that he had unlawfully killed the victim with malice aforethought. But he admitted no more. The Penal Code provides that where a crime is divided into degrees,...