Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

The People v. Quawntay Adams

October 13, 2011

THE PEOPLE, PLAINTIFF AND RESPONDENT,
v.
QUAWNTAY ADAMS, DEFENDANT AND APPELLANT.



(Super. Ct. No. SC055166B)

The opinion of the court was delivered by: Butz , J.

P. v. Adams

CA3

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED

California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 8.1115(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.

Defendant Quawntay Adams appeals from the trial court's denial of his petition for writ of error coram nobis regarding his 1993 conviction for assault with a deadly weapon on a peace officer and resulting three-year sentence in state prison. (Pen. Code, § 245, subd. (c).)*fn1 [1] We shall affirm.

FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

On October 21, 1992, while confined at the N.A. Chaderjain California Youth Authority (CYA),*fn2 defendant assaulted youth counselor Karen Tzikas, hitting her multiple times with a sock containing a can of beans while another ward held her down. Defendant was 17 years old when he committed the crime. He was arraigned as an adult on charges of assault with a deadly weapon on a peace officer (§ 245, subd. (c)) and battery with serious bodily injury (§ 243, subd. (d)).

On February 18, 1993, represented by counsel, defendant pleaded guilty to the assault charge in exchange for dismissal of the remaining count, and was sentenced to three years in state prison. The arrest disposition forms and the abstract of judgment reflect defendant's birth date as September 30, 1972. According to those documents, defendant was 20 years old when he committed the crime.

On March 14, 1995, defendant filed his first of three petitions for writ of habeas corpus in the superior court, alleging he was released from state prison on July 29, 1994, and thereafter "arrested by [CYA] for no reason" despite the court having informed him he was "not to return to [CYA]" and was to be released on parole.

Defendant filed his second of three petitions for writ of habeas corpus on April 5, 1995, in which he reiterated the allegations contained in the first petition and further alleged that he was 17 years old when he committed the crime. Defendant alleged that CYA felt he "was unfit for their treatment" and "sent [him] to court for prosecution." He also claimed he served a three-year sentence in state prison, but was "only sentenced to [two] years."

On May 2, 1995, the superior court denied both of defendant's petitions, ruling that "CYA's continued supervision over [defendant] is an administrative decision by CYA that is subject to administrative review" and defendant "must exhaust his administrative remedies before seeking relief from the court." With respect to defendant's age, the court stated, "Court records reflect that [defendant's] date of birth is September 30, 1972, that the assault occurred on October 21, 1992, and that [defendant] was, therefore, 20 years of age at the time of the assault." The court also ruled that the record confirmed the three-year sentence.

On July 18, 1995, defendant filed his third and final petition for writ of habeas corpus, alleging he was sentenced to state prison at the age of 17 in violation of Welfare and Institutions Code section 602*fn3 [3] because the "court believed [he] was 20 years of age." He further alleged that, following the 1993 assault at CYA, he was "refer[r]ed directly to superior court of adults" where he "filled out no papers asking [his] name or age and [he] never stated to the court or officials that [he] was 20 years old." He claimed that CYA "always knew of [his] real age" and his "birth certificate has always been in [his] [CYA] file." He also claimed he "never knew of the mistake until now."

On August 28, 1995, the superior court denied defendant's third habeas petition on the grounds that he waived his right to have his case proceed in juvenile court by failing to call to the court's attention the fact that ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.