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. Uhlan Eric CRISP, Defendant and Appellant.
In May 1962 a court sitting without a jury found defendant guilty of possession of heroin (Health & Saf.Code, s 11500). Before sentencing, the court found that ‘defendant is addicted or by reason of repeated use of narcotics is in imminent danger of becoming addicted to narcotics,’ adjourned the criminal proceedings, and committed defendant for treatment pursuant to Penal Code section 6451.1 In November 1966 the court reinstituted the criminal proceeding and sentenced defendant to imprisonment for the term prescribed by law. Defendant appeals.
Defendant contends that his conviction must be reversed because a confession obtained in violation of the rules subsequently announced in Escobedo v. Illinois (1964) 378 U.S. 478, 84 S.Ct. 1758, 12 L.Ed.2d 977 amd People v. Dorado (1965) 62 Cal.2d 338, 42 Cal.Rptr. 169, 398 P.2d 361 was introduced at his trial. Since we have held that those rules apply to all cases not final before Escobedo was decided on June 22, 1964 (People v. Rollins (1967) 65 Cal.2d 681, 691, 56 Cal.Rptr. 293, 423 P.2d 221; In re Lopez (1965) 62 Cal.2d 368, 372, 42 Cal.Rptr. 188, 398 P.2d 380; In re Shipp (1965) 62 Cal.2d 547, 549, 43 Cal.Rptr. 3, 399 P.2d 571), defendant concludes that the judgment must be reversed. The Attorney General contends that cases such as this one, which was tried before Escobedo but in which entry of judgment was postponed owing to a commitment to the narcotics rehabilitation facility, should be treated as an exception to the rule of the Lopez case. We answered this contention adversely to the Attorney General in People v. Kellum, Cal., 78 Cal.Rptr. 501, 455 P.2d 429.
The judgment is reversed.
FOOTNOTES
1. Penal Code section 6451, added by Statutes 1961, chapter 850, section 2, page 2225, was repealed by Statutes 1965, chapter 1226, section 1, page 3062, and substantially reenacted and recodified as Welfare and Institutions Code section 3051 by Statutes 1965, chapter 1223, section 2, page 3066.
TRAYNOR, Chief Justice.
McCOMB, PETERS, TOBRINER, MOSK, BURKE and SULLIVAN, JJ., concur.
Thank you for your feedback!
A free source of state and federal court opinions, state laws, and the United States Code. For more information about the legal concepts addressed by these cases and statutes visit FindLaw's Learn About the Law.
Docket No: Cr. 13126.
Decided: June 18, 1969
Court: Supreme Court of California,In Bank.
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)