Opinion

McCracken v. Teets

  • 41 Cal. 2d 648
  • 262 P.2d 561
  • 1953 Cal. LEXIS 314
Court
California Supreme Court
Filed
Nov 6, 1953
Status
Published
Author
Traynor
On the bench
Schauer, Traynor, Gibson, Shenk, Edmonds, Spence, Carter
Cited by
10 cases
Authority
More cited than 5.2%

The opinion

TRAYNOR, J.,

Dissenting. — Humanitarian considerations have led the Legislature to extend to persons under judgment of death the privilege of avoiding punishment while insane. *654 (Pen. Code, § 1367.) The warden of the state prison is charged with the responsibility of determining whether there is good reason to believe that a person under judgment of death has become insane. (Pen. Code, § 3701.) Mandamus cannot properly issue to compel the warden to institute proceedings under section 3701, since the courts are prohibited from suspending the execution of a judgment of death (Pen. Code, § 3700), and are without power, except as provided by statute, to determine the sanity of a person sentenced to death and in the custody of the warden. (In re Phyle, 30 Cal.2d 838, 846 [ 186 P.2d 134 ] ; see People v. Sloper, 198 Cal. 601, 608 [ 246 P. 802 ].) A person under judgment of death does not have a constitutional right to have execution of sentence suspended on the ground that he has become insane. (People v. Riley, 37 Cal.2d 510, 514 [ 235 P.2d 381 ]; Phyle v. Duffy, 34 Cal.2d 144, 157 [ 208 P.2d 668 ], concurring opinion.) Procedural due process does not prevent delegation of the duty of determining the sanity of a person under judgment of death to an administrative official and does not require judicial review of that official’s determination. (Solesbee v. Balkom, 339 U.S. 9, 12-13 [ 70 S.Ct. 457 , 94 L.Ed. 604 ] ; Nobles v. Georgia, 168 U.S. 398, 405-409 . [ 18 S.Ct. 87 , 42 L.Ed. 515 ] ; In re Phyle, supra, 30 Cal.2d at 847-850 ; Phyle v. Duffy, supra, 34 Cal.2d at 159-161 .)

Since the court had no jurisdiction to entertain the proceeding, I would reverse the judgment and direct the trial court to dismiss the proceeding. (In re McGee, 36 Cal.2d 592, 599 [ 226 P.2d 1 ].)

Spence, J., concurred.

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.