From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

In re Roberts

Supreme Court of California
Jul 16, 1970
2 Cal.3d 892 (Cal. 1970)

Opinion

Docket No. Crim. 14615.

July 16, 1970.

COUNSEL

Nancy A. Baker and David B. Strain for Petitioner.

Thomas C. Lynch, Attorney General, Albert W. Harris, Jr., Assistant Attorney General, and Edward P. O'Brien, Deputy Attorney General, for Respondent.


MEMORANDUM CASE


OPINION

THE COURT.

In this habeas corpus proceeding, petitioner contends that the judgment imposing the death sentence upon him should be set aside on the ground that the jury was selected in violation of Witherspoon v. Illinois (1968) 391 U.S. 510 [20 L.Ed.2d 776, 88 S.Ct. 1770], and on the ground that for various reasons the death penalty is unconstitutional as administered in this state. The record demonstrates Witherspoon error. Petitioner's other contentions were answered adversely to him in In re Anderson (1968) 69 Cal.2d 613 [ 73 Cal.Rptr. 21, 447 P.2d 117]. Accordingly, the remittitur issued in People v. Roberts, 65 Cal.2d 514 [ 55 Cal.Rptr. 412, 421 P.2d 420], is recalled and the judgment imposing the death penalty is reversed insofar as it relates to the penalty. In all other respects the judgment is affirmed. Petitioner is remanded to the custody of the Superior Court of the City and County of San Francisco for a new trial on the issue of penalty.

Mosk, J., did not participate herein.


I dissent. I would affirm the judgment in its entirety. (See Cal. Const., art. VI, § 13.)


Summaries of

In re Roberts

Supreme Court of California
Jul 16, 1970
2 Cal.3d 892 (Cal. 1970)
Case details for

In re Roberts

Case Details

Full title:In re DANIEL ALLEN ROBERTS on Habeas Corpus

Court:Supreme Court of California

Date published: Jul 16, 1970

Citations

2 Cal.3d 892 (Cal. 1970)
87 Cal. Rptr. 833
471 P.2d 481

Citing Cases

People v. Prysock

He may also comment on the credibility of a witness in light of all the evidence presented. ( People v.…