Winton v. Municipal Court
Decision Date | 14 May 1975 |
Citation | 48 Cal.App.3d 228,121 Cal.Rptr. 561 |
Court | California Court of Appeals Court of Appeals |
Parties | Gordon H. WINTON, Jr., Plaintiff and Respondent, v. MUNICIPAL COURT FOR the SACRAMENTO JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF SACRAMENTO COUNTY, Defendant; The PEOPLE of the State of California, Real Party in Interest and Appellant. Civ. 14605. |
Evelle J. Younger, Atty. Gen. by Janice Hayes, Deputy/Atty. Gen., Sacramento, for real party in interest and appellant.
On January 28, 1970, the plaintiff Gordon H. Winton, Jr., a member of the California State Bar for at least fifteen years and an assemblyman and chairman of the Assembly Criminal Procedures Committee, appeared at the morning session of the defendant Sacramento Municipal Court before Judge Thomas Wallner. The purpose of the appearance was to plead to a misdemeanor drunk driving charge (Veh.Code, § 23102, subd. (a)), which had been filed against him. Together with a number of other persons charged with Vehicle Code violations, he received collective advice from Judge Wallner, pertinent portions of which we quote as follows: 1
'Ladies and gentlemen, if I may have your attention, I'll advise you now of your rights in this court today and in the future.
'When the Deputy District Attorney calls your name, you will please come forward. If, for any reason, you want a continuance, please ask for it immediately. You may want a continuance to hire a lawyer, to get some money together to pay a fine, to get the results of some chemical test that you may have submitted to, or any number of other reasons. No reasonable request for a continuance will be refused.
'If you are willing to go forward today, the Deputy District Attorney will tell you of the charges pending against you. These charges are contained in a complaint which has been prepared and filed by the District Attorney's office.
'If you admit the truth of the charges, you will enter a plea of guilty, and, if you enter a plea of guilty, in most cases, judgment and sentence will be imposed this day. If you deny the truth of the charges, you will enter a plea of not guilty. If you enter a plea of not guilty, you will be asked 'Do you want a Court trial or a jury trial?'
'A Court trial is before a judge sitting alone. A jury trial is before a judge sitting with a jury of twelve people . The jury is chosen from a jury panel, usually composed of thirty-five to forty jurors, which panel, in turn, is chosen from the community by the Jury Commissioner.
'You are entitled to be represented by a lawyer at all stages of the proceedings. And, if you do not have the money to hire a lawyer of your choice, ask me, and I will appoint a lawyer to represent you at no expense to you.
'At your trial, the People have the burden of proving you guilty beyond a reasonable doubt and to a moral certainty. You have nothing to prove, as you are presumed to be innocent.
'You have the right to use the processes of this court to subpoena any witnesses that may exist to testify on your behalf.
'At your trial, you have a right to confront the witnesses called by the District Attorney's office, to cross-examine these witnesses. You have a right to remain silent. You have no duty to incriminate yourself. That is, you do not have to take the witness stand and be a witness against yourself.
'. . .nes
'If you are found guilty or plead guilty, judgment and sentence will be imposed. It '. . .err
will consist of imprisonment in the County Jail, the payment of a fine, the suspension of your driving privilege, or, in those cases where I feel no punishment is justified or necessary, no punishment will be imposed. I will say, 'The proceedings are suspended.' That means that, while you may have made a mistake, I don't feel that it's necessary to change your attitude by punishing you, that, perhaps, it was just an error in judgment that you have made, and it's not likely to happen again.
Thereafter, plaintiff's case was called, and we quote from the reporter's transcript:
'MR. FRANCHI (The Deputy District Attorney): Gordon Winton, Jr.
Sometime thereafter a recess was taken, and plaintiff spoke with Judge Wallner in chambers. The court was then again called into session and the following occurred:
Nothing more was done by plaintiff with reference to this conviction until well over The motion was argued before Judge Sheldon H. Grossfeld on Friday, November 9, 1973, and an evidentiary hearing was conducted on the following Monday, November 12, 1973. (In re Woods (1966) 64 Cal.2d 3, 9--11, 48 Cal.Rptr. 689, 409 P.2d 913.) Plaintiff testified in support of his motion. Judge Grossfeld denied the motion, stating in part:
two years later. On September 18, 1973, plaintiff was arrested and charged with misdemeanor drunk driving, again in the defendant municipal court. The complaint charged the 1970 offense as a prior conviction, thus invoking among other penalties the then mandatory minimum five day jail sentence of subdivision (d) of section 23102 of the Vehicle Code ( ) and the one year operator's license suspension of subdivision (c) of section 13352 of the Vehicle Code. On October 26, 1973, through counsel, plaintiff filed a motion in municipal court to strike the 1970 conviction as invalid, because allegedly (1) plaintiff did not waive his right to counsel, and (2) Judge Wallner coerced the plea of guilty, thus making it involuntary.
The 1973 complaint proceeded to jury trial on November 13, 1973, and on November 16, the jury rendered a verdict of guilty. Prior to sentence and on December 10, 1973, a petition for writ of mandate was filed by plaintiff in Superior Court to compel the defendant municipal court to set aside and strike the 1970 conviction for the same alleged constitutional invalidity. A non-evidentiary hearing was held in the superior court before Judge Irving H. Perluss on December 26, 1973, and again on February 22, 1974. On March 5, 1974, the superior court made an order granting the petition and commanding the defendant municipal court to set aside the 1970 conviction. The real party in interest (the People) has appealed from the judgment entered pursuant to that ruling.
When the 1973 complaint charging a misdemeanor was filed in the municipal court, (which court, and not the superior court, had jurisdiction thereof--Pen.Code, § 1462), it became solely that court's business to process the case in all erspects. It was for that court to rule on all motions, including the motion to strike the prior conviction; the superior court had no jurisdiction over the defendant, the offense, the proceeding, or any motions connected therewith. (Cal.Const. art. VI, § 5; Pen.Code, § 1462; In re McKinney (1968) 70 Cal.2d 8, 73...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
People v. Superior Court (Williams)
...Mission Imports, Inc. v. Superior Court (1982) 31 Cal.3d 921, 927, fn. 5, 184 Cal.Rptr. 296, 647 P.2d 1075; Winton v. Municipal Court (1975) 48 Cal.App.3d 228, 237, 121 Cal.Rptr. 561; Mosby v. Superior Court (1974) 43 Cal.App.3d 219, 228, 117 Cal.Rptr. 588; accord. Shipp v. Superior Court (......
-
James H., In re
...record, had extensive personal exposure to law enforcement personnel and judicial proceedings. (Cf. Winton v. Municipal Court (1975) 48 Cal.App.3d 228, 242, 121 Cal.Rptr. 561.) Finally, immediately after being informed of his right to remain silent, minor, represented by counsel, expressly ......
-
People v. Escarcega
... ... Raul ESCARCEGA, Defendant and Appellant ... B004487 ... Court of Appeal, Second District, Division 3, California ... Oct. 14, 1986 ... Review Denied Feb. 5, ... (Cf. Eshaghian v. Municipal Court (1985) 168 Cal.App.3d 1070, 1079, 214 Cal.Rptr. 712.) "The term 'exceptional circumstance' ... (See Winton v. Municipal Court (1975) 48 Cal.App.3d 228, 236-237, 121 Cal.Rptr. 561; cf. People v. Shelley ... ...
-
People v. Fulkman
...or superior) made whatever findings were necessary to support the judgment or order. [Citations.]" (Winton v. Municipal Court (1975) 48 Cal.App.3d 228, 236, 121 Cal.Rptr. 561.) Here the magistrate concluded that the officers' actions were reasonable under the circumstances. In making her de......