In re Barnes

California Court of Appeal

In re Barnes

127 Cal. App. 708

CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal

DecidedNovember 28, 1932

DocketCrim. No. 2295

StatusPublished

This text of 127 Cal. App. 708 (In re Barnes) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering California Court of Appeal primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

In re Barnes, 127 Cal. App. 708 (Cal. Ct. App. 1932).

Pincite

Opinion

WORKS, P. J.

Petitioner is in custody under an alleged conviction on a criminal charge before a justice of the peace, petitioner’s contention being that the docket of the justice fails to show that petitioner had a trial before the judgment of conviction was rendered.

At the oral argument respondent was permitted to file an amended return to the writ, by which it was shown that since the issuance of the writ the justice had corrected the docket to show that a trial actually occurred. Petitioner contends that a justice of the peace may not amend his docket at such a stage. This contention cannot be upheld. (See In re Glavich, 74 Cal. App. 144 [239 Pac. 707].)

The writ is discharged and the petitioner is remanded to custody.

Craig, J., and Thompson (Ira F.), J., concurred.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

WORKS, P. J.

Petitioner is in custody under an alleged conviction on a criminal charge before a justice of the peace, petitioner’s contention being that the docket of the justice fails to show that petitioner had a trial before the judgment of conviction was rendered.

At the oral argument respondent was permitted to file an amended return to the writ, by which it was shown that since the issuance of the writ the justice had corrected the docket to show that a trial actually occurred. Petitioner contends that a justice of the peace may not amend his docket at such a stage. This contention cannot be upheld. (See In re Glavich, 74 Cal. App. 144 [239 Pac. 707].)

The writ is discharged and the petitioner is remanded to custody.

Craig, J., and Thompson (Ira F.), J., concurred.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

127 Cal. App. 708, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-barnes-calctapp-1932.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack