TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

People v. Deutsch

The PEOPLE, Respondent, v. WALTER DEUTSCH, Appellant

People v. Deutsch, 60 P.2d 155 (Cal. Ct. App. 1936)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
California Court of Appeal · State Appellate Courts
Decided
August 18, 1936
Docket
No. Crim. 2896
Judges
Crail
Citations
60 P.2d 15516 Cal. App. 2d 1211936 Cal. App. LEXIS 247
Cited by 18

Opinion — Crail

*122 CRAIL, P. J.

This is an appeal from an order of the superior court denying á petition for a writ of error coram nobis.

The defendant was charged with sixty-one counts of felony together with a prior conviction of a felony. After his trial had continued for a full week and when the People’s ease against him was about closed, he asked permission to change his plea of not guilty to guilty on five of the counts. After considerable hesitation both on the part of the court and the district attorney, his request was granted. He thereupon pleaded guilty to five counts and at the same time secured a dismissal of the remaining counts. Approximately eight and one-half months later, defendant filed in the trial court his petition for the writ above referred to in which he sought the setting aside of his pleas of guilty and for permission to plead not guilty upon the alleged ground that “the pleas of guilty were not free and voluntary but were secured from him through duress and threats”.

Under the authority of People v. Aseltine, 139 Cal. App. 768 [ 34 Pac. (2d) 830 ] (hearing denied by the Supreme Court), the order of the trial court must be affirmed. The exceptional remedy of a writ of error coram nobis applies only upon a strong and convincing showing of the deprivation of legal rights by extrinsic causes.

(People v. Schwarz, 201 Cal. 309 [ 257 Pac. 71 ].) What defendant calls in his brief “duress and threats” turns out to be advice from his own counsel to plead guilty. Furthermore, essential parts of the affidavits upon which the defendant relies for the writ were denied in detail in affidavits filed by the People, and this court on appeal may not weigh evidence. There is nothing in this case which upon appeal would permit a reversal of the order.

The order is affirmed.

Wood, J., and Gould, J., pro tern., concurred.

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

Cited by 18 cases

View all citing references →
1941: 11942: 21944: 11945: 11946: 21947: 11948: 11950: 11951: 21952: 11953: 21962: 11963: 11968: 119412026peak 1942 · 2

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. In re De Beau Carr ex rel. Steve167 P.2d 243 (Cal. Ct. App. 1946)
  2. People v. Kirk220 P.2d 976 (Cal. Ct. App. 1950)
  3. People v. Egan167 P.2d 766 (Cal. Ct. App. 1946)
  4. People v. Butler161 P.2d 401 (Cal. Ct. App. 1945)
  5. People v. Darcy180 P.2d 752 (Cal. Ct. App. 1947)
  6. Davidson v. State437 P.2d 620 (Idaho 1968)

Most recent

  1. Davidson v. State437 P.2d 620 (Idaho 1968)
  2. People v. Quigley222 Cal. App. 2d 694 (1963)
  3. People v. O'NEAL204 Cal. App. 2d 707 (1962)
  4. People v. Cruzado Ortiz74 P.R. 872 (1953)
  5. Pueblo v. Cruzado Ortiz74 P.R. Dec. 934 (1953)
  6. People v. Elmer246 P.2d 60 (Cal. Ct. App. 1952)

Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.

Authorities cited 2

DepthCaseCited by
People v. Schwarz, 257 P. 71 (Cal. 1927) 77
People v. Aseltine, 139 Cal. App. 768 (1934) 9

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list