People v. Perez

Citations: 24 Cal. App. 3d 340; 100 Cal. Rptr. 834; 1972 Cal. App. LEXIS 1142Docket: Crim. 20047

Court: California Court of Appeal; March 24, 1972; California; State Appellate Court

SummaryOriginalCytator Case TreatmentBackward CitatorAnalysis

EnglishEspañolSimplified EnglishEspañol Fácil

Manuel Perez was convicted by a jury for violating Penal Code section 4530, subdivision (c), pertaining to escape due to failure to return after a temporary release. His motion for a new trial was denied, and he was sentenced to state prison, with the new sentence to run concurrently with any existing sentences. His appeals regarding the judgment, sentence, and new trial denial are treated as an appeal from the conviction itself.

In 1967, Perez had been committed as a narcotic addict following a municipal court conviction. After multiple unsuccessful outpatient releases, he was admitted to the California Men's Colony-East in 1970. He received a 72-hour temporary release on November 25, 1970, to seek employment, with clear conditions outlined in a release form he signed, which included a warning that failure to return would trigger escape procedures. Records from the Colony indicated no upcoming release dates or permanent parole status for Perez.

Perez failed to return by the designated time on November 28, 1970. He was subsequently apprehended on February 10, 1971, following suspicious behavior in a high-crime area. A search revealed a felony escape warrant against him, leading to his return to the Colony and subsequent prosecution. Initially charged with escape under subdivision (b) of section 4530, the information was later amended to charge him under subdivision (c).

No demurrer or motion in arrest of judgment was filed regarding the amended information. The defendant's motion to dismiss, claiming non-compliance with Welfare and Institutions Code section 3306 for a temporary release, was denied. In support of his motion for a new trial, the defendant asserted that he referenced Welfare and Institutions Code section 3002 on the form. Most relevant statutes were effective on November 18, 1970, except for Penal Code section 4530, subdivision (c), and an amendment to Penal Code section 2690, which became effective on November 23, 1970. The defendant argued that his conviction violated constitutional prohibitions against ex post facto laws since Penal Code section 4530, subdivision (c), was not in force when he signed the form. The court disagreed, clarifying that an ex post facto law criminalizes actions retroactively or increases penalties, which did not apply here since the signing was not essential to the crime of escape. The escape occurred after the relevant statute was in force, negating the ex post facto claim. Additionally, the court noted that the prosecution was not enforcing a contract but rather addressing statutory violations. Regarding which statute applied, the court found that while the defendant was committed under Welfare and Institutions Code section 3050, he was also subject to Penal Code section 4530, subdivision (c), due to his confinement status. The latter statute, being more specific and applicable to his situation, controlled over the more general Welfare and Institutions Code section 3002 regarding temporary releases.

Defendant contends that the "xx" mark on his release form signifies that his three-day furlough was authorized under Welfare and Institutions Code section 3306, arguing that his temporary release was invalid due to a lack of evidence showing he was within 90 days of a release date. He claims this invalidity renders his failure to return lawful. However, the court finds this argument overly technical and illogical. Even assuming the temporary release was defective, the defendant would still be considered "confined in" the Colony under Penal Code section 4504, subd. b. An invalid permit for leaving the facility does not negate constructive custody that could lead to an escape charge.

The court emphasizes that the defendant's temporary release authorization, regardless of its validity, expired after 72 hours. The legal invalidity of his release does not affect his obligation to return. The ruling is supported by common law, indicating that a prisoner released under an unauthorized agreement remains guilty of escape. The judgment of conviction is affirmed, with references to relevant case law and penal code sections regarding the definitions and consequences of escape from custody.

The department holds jurisdiction over several institutions, including the California Men's Colony and the California Rehabilitation Center. Under Welfare and Institutions Code section 3002, individuals who escape or attempt to escape from lawful custody are subject to imprisonment for up to seven years. The management and oversight of the California Rehabilitation Center, including the care, custody, training, and treatment of confined individuals, fall under the Director of Corrections. The Penal Code provisions apply to this institution as it is classified as a prison under the Department of Corrections' jurisdiction. Welfare and Institutions Code section 3306 allows the Director to authorize temporary removal or release of confined persons for medical treatment unavailable at the facility, for reintegration preparation within 90 days of release, or for participation in conservation camp programs. Similarly, Penal Code section 2690 grants the Director the authority to permit temporary removal or release for medical treatment and disaster aid during state emergencies. A 1970 amendment to the statute clarified the language regarding disaster aid and community reintegration purposes.