Hayes v. Superior Court of San Joaquin Cnty.

Full title: BLUFFORD HAYES, JR., Petitioner, v. THE SUPERIOR COURT OF SAN JOAQUIN…

Court: COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT (San Joaquin)

Date published: May 24, 2012

C067903 (Cal. Ct. App. May. 24, 2012)

Opinion

C067903

05-24-2012

BLUFFORD HAYES, JR., Petitioner, v. THE SUPERIOR COURT OF SAN JOAQUIN COUNTY, Respondent; THE PEOPLE, Real Party in Interest.

RAYE

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.

(Super. Ct. No. 30924)

ORDER MODIFYING

OPINION

[NO CHANGE IN JUDGMENT]

THE COURT: It is ordered that the opinion filed herein on May 23, 2012, be modified as follows: 1. On page 2, the last sentence of the first full paragraph, beginning "The petition is therefore granted," is deleted and the following sentence is inserted in its place:

We will therefore issue a peremptory writ of mandate.

2. On page 19, the first sentence of the first full paragraph, beginning "We therefore must," is modified to read as follows:

We therefore must issue a peremptory writ of mandate directing the trial court to conduct an evidentiary
hearing to resolve the many factual disputes upon which petitioner's entitlement to relief hinges.

3. On page 19, the Disposition is modified to read as follows:

Let a peremptory writ of mandate issue directing the respondent court to conduct an evidentiary hearing to develop the factual basis for petitioner's motion to recuse the San Joaquin County District Attorney's Office from prosecuting the retrial of petitioner's 1980 conviction. In all other respects, the petition for a writ of mandate is denied.

There is no change in the judgment. BY THE COURT:

RAYE, P.J.

BLEASE, J.

ROBIE, J.