Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
The PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. Ernest Miller JOLLEY, Defendant and Appellant.
Ernest Miller Jolley, accused by information of attempted robbery while armed with a deadly weapon, pleaded guilty to attempted robbery. It was alleged in the information that he had suffered a prior conviction of felony, which he denied. When he entered his plea he was represented by the public defender. He waived trial by jury as to the prior conviction and as to the charge that he had been armed with a deadly weapon. It was stipulated that these issues should be determined by the court from the probation report to be filed and any evidence offered by the People. The court file in the case in which defendant suffered the prior conviction was received in evidence.
From the probation report and the court file the court determined that defendant was armed with a deadly weapon at the time of the attempted robbery and that he had suffered the prior conviction. It was also shown that following the former conviction probation had been revoked.
In the former case defendant was sentenced to state prison; in the present case probation was denied and defendant was sentenced to state prison, the sentences to run concurrently.
Defendant appealed from the judgment in propria persona; he applied for appointment of counsel on the appeal; the application was denied; defendant was notified, was given time for a brief and has filed none. The proceedings in the two cases are shown by the superior court records to have been regular. The findings of the court that defendant was armed with a deadly weapon at the time of the attempted robbery and that he had suffered the prior conviction were made upon sufficient evidence.
The judgment is affirmed.
PER CURIAM.
Thank you for your feedback!
As the largest network of trusted legal brands, we help firms build authority across the platforms consumers and AI systems rely on most. Our network helps attorneys strengthen visibility, credibility, and preference where legal decisions begin.
Docket No: Cr. 8510.
Decided: March 08, 1963
Court: District Court of Appeal, Second District, Division 3, California.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)