People v. Pettegrew , 8 Cal.3d 347

People v. Pettegrew , 8 Cal.3d 347

[Crim. No. 15841. Supreme Court of California. November 22, 1972.]

THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. ROBERT REX PETTEGREW, Defendant and Appellant

In Bank. (Opinion by Wright C. J., with Peters, Tobriner and Mosk, JJ., concurring. Separate dissenting and concurring opinion by Burke, J., with McComb and Sullivan, JJ., concurring.)

COUNSEL

Elinor Chandler for Defendant and Appellant.

A. L. Wirin, Fred Okrand, Zaide Kirtley, Zad Leavy, Levinson, Rowen, Klein & Leavy, Norma G. Zarky, Alan F. Charles, Pat Kowitz, Joan K. Bradford, Laurence R. Sperber, Paul N. Halvonik, Charles C. Marson, Terry J. Hatter, Jerome Levine, Roblin J. Williamson, Roland E. Brandel, August B. Rothschild, Jr., and Judith G. Kleinberg as Amici Curiae on behalf of Defendant and Appellant.

Evelle J. Younger, Attorney General, William E. James, Assistant Attorney General, and Howard J. Schwab, Deputy Attorney General, for Plaintiff and Respondent. [8 Cal.3d 348]

Musick, Peeler & Garrett, James E. Ludlam, Robert D. Girard, Hassard, Bonnington, Rogers & Huber, Howard Hassard, Lawrence W. Kessenick, Robert L. Sassone and Melbourne B. Weddle as Amici Curiae on behalf of Plaintiff and Respondent.

Walter R. Trinkaus, J. J. Brandlin, James E. Ryan, Ray E. McAllister, Andrews, Andrews, Thaxter & Jones, John F. Duff, Richard G. Logan, Curran, Golden, McDevitt & Martin and William R. Kennedy as Amici Curiae.

OPINION OF THE COURT

Memorandum

WRIGHT, J.

Defendant, a licensed physician, was charged by information with three counts of violating Penal Code section 274 (abortion). The case was submitted on the record of the preliminary examination and certain stipulations on the first count only. Defendant appeals from the judgment (order granting probation) following conviction by the court sitting without a jury.

For the reasons stated in People v. Barksdale, ante, page 320 [105 Cal.Rptr. 1, 503 P.2d 257], the judgment (order granting probation) is reversed with directions to the trial court to dismiss the information.

BURKE, J.

For the reasons stated in my dissenting and concurring opinion in People v. Barksdale, ante, page 320 [105 Cal.Rptr. 1, 503 P.2d 257], I would affirm the judgment.

McComb, J., and Sullivan, J., concurred.