Document: 344 U.S. 357 73 S.Ct. 293 97 L.Ed. 387 EDELMANv.PEOPLE OF STATE CALIFORNIA. No. 85. Argued Nov. 19, 1952. Decided Jan. 12, 1953. Mr. Emanuel Redfield, New York City, for petitioner. Philip E. Grey, Los Angeles, Cal., respondent. Justice CLARK delivered the opinion of Court. 1 Petitioner stands convicted under § 647(5) Penal Code California, which provides in relevant part that 'Every * dissolute person Is a vagrant, and is punishable by fine not exceeding five hundred dollars ($500), or imprisonment county jail six months, both such imprisonment.' The conviction was affirmed Appellate Department Angeles County Superior Court an order recited appeal had been submitted without argument. A motion to recall remittitur vacate judgment appellate court denied after full hearing before three judges. We granted certiorari because serious constitutional questions raised as validity vagrancy statute its application 343 955, 72 1054. However, on oral argument, doubts arose whether federal were properly presented record. Accordingly, it necessary at outset determine we have jurisdiction this case. 2 contends, first, his violates Due Process Clause Fourteenth Amendment vague, indefinite uncertain. record indicates defense trial but first time fifth petitioner's grounds appeal, stated follows: '5. Vagrancy unconstitutional vague indefinite.' 3 It clear power decide rights violated when are seasonably accordance with requirements state law. Hulbert v. City Chicago, 1906, 202 275, 26 617, 50 1026; Mutual Life Ins. Co. McGrew, 1903, 188 291, 308, 23 375, 378, 47 480. Noncompliance local law can thus be adequate ground decision below. Aside from regarding scope review cases one, note California permits affirmance criminal where appellant fails appear.1 follows question invalid us. 4 argument Equal Protection infringed discriminatory enforcement merits only brief comment. evidence adduced showed most used authorities all might applicable. Doubtless recognizing necessity showing systematic intentional discrimination, petitioner made offer proof phrased follows, 'I want show police records there thousands individuals city walking around committed many more offenses than defendant never charged vagrancy.' This connection subpoena addressed section. On attorney quashed accompanying affidavit did comply Since determined action, no preserved aspect Hedgebeth State North Carolina, 1948, 334 806, 68 1185, 92 1739. 5 urges, finally, he deprived notice opportunity court. careful study discloses these facts: December 13, 1949, one day sentence imposed, who represented during nine-day Municipal filed written An substitution attorneys February 7, 1950. substituted thereafter appeared hearings settlement statement appeal. Preparation lengthy process, concluded until June 18, 1951, allowed settled final form judge.2 6 After conviction, 'Recall Remittitur Vacate Judgment' 'was occasion(ed) inadvertence, mistake fact clerk above entitled court, incomplete presentation facts *.' In supporting affidavit, original received set argument; then went office advised attending desk proper notify, assured counsel would notified date hearing. Substituted stating notice.3 7 asserted deprivation any right. Further, sought what, law, extraordinary remedy, available 'jurisdiction render complained does affirmatively appear result fraud, imposition misapprehension facts'. People Stone, 93 Cal.App.2d 858, 861, 210 P.2d 78, 80, cited; Calif.L.Rev. 354.4 Respondent has also suggested habeas corpus test constitutionality restraint. borne out re Bell, 1942, 19 Cal.2d 488, 122 22, supreme decided may applicant convicted. writ is, fact, remedy purpose exhausted Under raise other objections proceedings, right counsel. supra, page 501, 22. denial motion, therefore, rested ground, choice wrong Woods Nierstheimer, 1946, 328 211, 214, 66 996, 998, 90 1177. case doubt about nature below rested. Cf. Tax Commission Van Cott, 1939, 306 511, 59 605, 83 950; Minnesota National Tea Co., 1940, 309 551, 60 676, 84 920; Herb Pitcairn, 1945, 324 117, 65 459, 89 789. claims merits, whatever their improvidently must dismissed. Stembridge Georgia, 1952, 541, 834. so ordered. 8 Writ 9 JACKSON concurs except thinks material will grant True, question. That passed upon dismissed default. Whether default should considered excusable left highly At events, asking relief claim take circumstances forbidden Constitution United States, frivolous if made. Hence, reasons practice, 10 BLACK whom DOUGLAS concurs, dissenting. 11 'vagrancy' Angeles. He given 90-day sentence. based primarily what said public speeches park. appealed highest could obtain review. One number indefinite. rules specifically require shall mailed heard. admits neither knew As present called Consequently consideration statute. Immediately discovery moved action. With knowledge foregoing facts, motion. contentions rejected heard through himself 'is guaranteed prisoner sacred jury. means provided guilt innocence.' Ex parte Hoge, 48 Cal. 3, 6; Alboria, 95 Cal.App. 42, 50—51, 272 P. 321. I agree refusal give him due process Amendment. See Oliver, 333 257, 273, 499, 507, 682; Cole Arkansas, 196, 201, 514, 517, 644; Powell Alabama, 287 45, 68,1 53 55, 63, 77 158. Such cannot justified 'adequate non-federal ground.' For reason dismiss reverse court's judgment. 12 rests belief still proceeding courts. And Court's availability buttressed presumption deny here alleged. Mooney Holohan, Warden, 294 103, 113, 55 340, 342, 79 791. Moreover, refuse Act, seek States district Moore Dempsey, 261 86, 43 265, 67 543. But my leads me conclude wiser course clarification bases cf. even superficial examination reveal gravity urges unconsidered undecided. 13 Subsection 647 idle, lewd, person, associate known thieves *' $500 both.2 being 'dissolute' person. ambiguity consequent broad reach crime 'dissoluteness' patent. efforts reduce greatly increased it. judge told jury accused 'any violation particular act' 'a certain status' 'in condition.' His 'character' alone involved, since 'vagrancy status condition act.' therefore tried subjective 'status,' easiest thing world prove disprove. difficulty easier additional statements jury: 14 'Vagrancy continuing offense. differs chronic rather acute; continues complete subjects offender arrest reforms. guilty vagrant place found, long character remains unchanged, although innocent act demonstrating character. character, before, ultimate you decide.' 15 dictionary definition described nebulous amplitude know how defend himself. said: 16 'Now, defined 'loosed restraint, unashamed, lawless, loose morals conduct, recklessly abandoned sensual pleasures, profligate, wanton, debauched.' Now, word 'dissolute,' see definition, covers acts necessarily confined immorality. Other laxness looseness lawlessness amount dissoluteness.' 17 During witnesses patently like making There seems chiefly involved political economic included attacks force. witness testified publicly thief swore advocate 'force violence, change brought bullets.' hostile use intemperate language. policeman prophesied 'would fair trial'—a prophecy fear viewed whole entirely refute. solicited funds aid carrying publicity work, help pay numerous instituted against municipal defacing park bench thick concrete standing make speech. 18 seem matter supererogation argue provision face enforced too meet safeguarding standards country. true free speech involved. field said, 'It indefinite, interpreted, permit within language punishment incidents fairly protection guarantee void, face, contrary Amendment.' Winters York, 509, 665, 667, 840. 20 obviously prosecution length them constituted danger. 21 adhere view courts astute examine strike down dragnet legislation abridge discussion 'views political, social questions.' Schneider Jersey, 308 147, 161, 163, 146, 150, 151, 152, 155. Garza, 1927, 86 97, 260 390; Rule 8, Rules Appeal Courts Inferior Criminal Cases, amended January 6, 1947; Deering's Code, 1253; Sukovitzen, 901, 155 406. To same effect, Dowd 340 206, 71 262, 215. Apparently agreed some judging docket entry November 1950, 'Defendant's Counsel engross Statement Appeal,' dated March service engrossed 3(b) Revised provides, part, 'Failure mail (of hearing) affect Department.' McDermott, 1893, 247, 32 Supreme denied, clearly grounds, similar those instant Cochran Kansas, 316 255, 258, 62 1068, 1070, 1453, held Kansas equal laws refusing privileges afforded others. mere reading sufficient similarity Jersey vagueness Lanzetta 451, 618, 888.

Category: 8