Gomez v. Super. Ct.
Annotate this CaseThis case arose when petitioner filed a petition for writ of mandate in the Lassen Superior Court, seeking to require the prison to process four administrative appeals of grievances that he had filed. At issue was whether a court commissioner had the authority to summarily deny a petition for writ of mandamus or habeas corpus under Code of Civil Procedure section 259, subdivision (a), which authorized commissioners to hear and determine ex parte motions for orders and alternative writs and writs of habeas corpus. The court concluded that section 259(a) did grant this authority to commissioners and that, at least when the petition sought to enforce a prisoner's rights while in confinement - but did not seek to collaterally attack the criminal conviction that provided the basis for that confinement - the summary denial of a writ petition constituted a subordinate judicial duty properly undertaken by a commissioner within the meaning of article VI, section 22 of the California Constitution.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.