Swarthout v. Superior Court
145 Cal. Rptr. 3d 760
Cal. Ct. App.2012Background
- J.T., an inmate sentenced to 19 years to life, was housed at Solano; Culver City Police sought a temporary transfer for an investigation; the Los Angeles Superior Court issued a transfer order despite no pending proceeding; Warden Swarthout opposed the order and sought reconsideration; the trial court held a hearing and reaffirmed the transfer order; petition for writ of mandate followed, challenging the court’s authority.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the trial court had statutory authority to order inmate transfer | Swarthout: no statutory basis for non-criminal transfer | Swarthout's position not applicable; City argues inherent authority | No statutory or inherent authority for non-judicial investigative transfer |
| Whether Penal Code sections 2620 and 2621 authorize such transfers | Transfers not for appearance or witness; sections inapplicable | Court order could be construed as transfer under these sections | Sections 2620-2621 not applicable to investigative transfer |
| Whether CCP 187 or inherent powers authorize non-statutory transfers | 187 or inherent power could permit transfer | No nonstatutory transfer power; investigative purpose not within judicial function | Neither CCP 187 nor inherent powers authorize this transfer |
| Whether the court’s inherent or statutory powers could aid investigation | Court could aid administration of justice | Investigation is executive function; court cannot aid in investigation without statutory basis | Court lacked authority to transfer for investigative purposes |
| Effect of 2012 amendment to Penal Code 2690 on permissibility of transfers | Legislature implicitly approved transfers for investigations | Amendment grants secretary—not courts—discretion; not applicable here | Amendment assigns authority to secretary, not court; not applicable to this case |
Key Cases Cited
- Payne v. Superior Court, 17 Cal.3d 908 (Cal. 1976) (court lacks statutory power to transport inmate except specified circumstances)
- People v. Sequeira, 126 Cal.App.3d 1 (Cal. App. Dist. 1 1981) (section 187 case on lineup transfer authority)
- Goodwin v. Superior Court, 90 Cal.App.4th 215 (Cal. App. Dist. 2 2001) (187 does not confer jurisdiction where none exists)
- In re Amber S., 15 Cal.App.4th 1260 (Cal. App. Dist. 4 1993) (inherent powers to carry out duties; not to aid investigation)
- Wood v. Superior Court, 36 Cal.App.3d 811 (Cal. App. Dist. 1 1974) (discussion of 1567 vs other authorities for presence of prisoner)
- Gananian v. Wagstaffe, 199 Cal.App.4th 1532 (Cal. App. 2011) (investigation is executive function; no inherent court power to aid)
- Payne v. Superior Court, 17 Cal.3d 908 (Cal. 1976) (reiterated limits on court's ability to compel transport)