Court Opinion

ID: 9536416
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-07 06:59:35.035356+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T14:54:28.349264
License: Public Domain

BURKE, J.
I concur in that portion of the majority opinion holding that the judgment as to guilt should not be reversed for the alleged errors being raised on habeas corpus after the judgment has become final.
I dissent from that portion of the opinion which reverses the judgment imposing the death penalty. In that connection, I would deny the writ for the reasons set forth in the prior opinion of this court in July 1963 when the judgment of conviction of this defendant and the sentence of death were both affirmed after full review and consideration following which the United States Supreme Court denied certiorari (377 U.S. 1007 [84 S.Ct. 1924, 12 L.Ed.2d 1055]).
The majority base their reversal of the death penalty on People v. Morse, 60 Cal.2d 631 [36 Cal.Rptr. 201, 388 P.2d 33], In this connection, I refer to the dissents of Mr. Justice White and Mr. Justice Sehauer in People v. Terry, 57 Cal.2d 538, 569, 572 [21 Cal.Rptr. 185, 370 P.2d 985] ; and of Mr. Justice Sehauer in People v. Hillery, 62 Cal.2d 692, 714-715 [44 Cal.Rptr. 30, 401 P.2d 382], wherein he pointed out that section 4½, article VI, of the California Constitution “per *415emptorily forbids this court to reverse for mere error ‘as to any matter of pleading, or . . . procedure, ’ whether prejudicial or otherwise, ‘ unless, after an examination of the entire cause, including the evidence, the court shall be of the opinion that the error complained of has resulted in a miscarriage of justice. ’ ”
In the instant case, as in Hillery, there is no suggestion that there is any doubt whatsoever as to the guilt of this defendant, or the justness of the verdict. Under these circumstances there can be no reasonable probability that a result more favorable to the defendant would have been reached in the absence of the error and a reversal of a judgment of a trial court based thereon in itself results in a miscarriage of justice in violation of the prohibitions of section 4½, article VI of the California Constitution. (People v. Watson, 46 Cal.2d 818, 835 [299 P.2d 243].)
See also dissenting opinions in In re Lessard, 62 Cal.2d 497, 513-514 [42 Cal.Rptr. 583, 399 P.2d 39], and In re Gaines, ante, p. 234 [45 Cal.Rptr. 865, 404 P.2d 473].
McComb, J., and White, J.,* concurred.

Retired Associate Justice of the Supreme Court sitting under assignment by the Chairman of the Judicial Council.