Snebold v. Justice Court for Folsom Judicial Dist. of Sacramento County
Decision Date | 09 March 1962 |
Parties | SNEBOLD, Plaintiff and Appellant, v. JUSTICE COURT FOR FOLSOM JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF SACRAMENTO COUNTY et al., Defendants and Respondents. Civ. 10402. |
Court | California Court of Appeals Court of Appeals |
Charles H. Snebold, petitioner-appellant, in pro per., for appellant.
Stanley Mosk, Atty. Gen., by Doris H. Maier, Asst. Atty. Gen., and C. Michael Gianola, Deputy Atty. Gen. for respondent.
Petitioner appeals in propria persona from an order of the Superior Court in and for the County of Sacramento, denying a petition for a writ of mandate to compel R. J. Ronchi, as Justice of the Peace of the Justice Court of the Folsom Judicial District, to file a small claims action in which said petitioner seeks to recover from Robert A. Heinze, as Warden of the California State Prison at Folsom a sum of money under $50.00 alleged to be illegally detained and withheld by said warden. Petitioner is an inmate of said prison. Consequently, he has no right to file a civil action as section 2600 of the Penal Code provides, in part:
'A sentence of imprisonment in a state prison * * * suspends all the civil rights of the person so sentenced * * *.'
As stated by this court in In re Robinson, 112 Cal.App.2d 626, 629, 249 P.2d 982:
'While the State may, pursuant to section 2600 of the Penal Code, suspend the civil rights of a prisoner imprisoned in a state prison insofar as the right to file ordinary civil actions is concerned, yet the State has no power to deny a person the right to file in any court a petition or other document which purports to seek some remedy or relief relating to the offense for which he was imprisoned.'
Here, appellant seeks no remedy or relief falling within the exception stated.
There is no merit in appellant's contentions that he has not lost his civil rights, or that Penal Code section 2600 is unconstitutional.
As pointed out by our Supreme Court in In re Ferguson, 55 Cal.2d 663, 671, 12 Cal.Rptr. 753, 757, 361 P.2d 417, 421:
...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
People v. Hernandez
...285, 68 S.Ct. 1049, 92 L.Ed. 1356; In re Ferguson, 55 Cal.2d 663, 670-671, 12 Cal.Rptr. 753, 361 P.2d 417; Snebold v. Justice Court, 201 Cal.App.2d 152, 154, 19 Cal.Rptr. 704.) Prison authorities may subject inmates to intense surveillance and search unimpeded by Fourth Amendment barriers (......
-
People v. Hopkins
...suspends the right of an imprisoned felon to bring a civil action without the consent of the Adult Authority. (Snebold v. Justice Court (1962) 201 Cal.App.2d 152, 19 Cal.Rptr. 704.) The situation here presented is to be distinguished from that in People v. Lawrence (1956) 140 Cal.App.2d 133......
-
Ricci's Estate, In re
... ... Civ. 10278 ... District Court of Appeal, Third District, California ... March ... SCHOTTKY, Justice ... This is an appeal from a ... in the superior court of San Francisco County, which complaint was dismissed by court order for ... ...