Maas v. Super. Court
Annotate this CaseIn 1998, Michael Maas was convicted of grand theft of an automobile and unlawful driving or taking of a vehicle. He was sentenced to 25 years to life in prison. In a subsequent case, he was convicted of burglary and forgery of a fictitious check and sentenced to a consecutive term of 25 years to life. Maas petitioned for writ of habeas corpus, raising issues regarding the validity of his sentence and ineffective assistance from his counsel. He also argued the superior court denied him his statutory right under section 170.6 to challenge the judge assigned to his habeas corpus petition in that court. After its review of the matter, the Court of Appeal held that where petitioner collaterally attacks his criminal convictions and sentences by way of a petition for writ of habeas corpus and the matter is assigned to a judge other than the original trial judge, petitioner may assert a peremptory challenge under Code of Civil Procedure section 170.6 to the judge assigned to the petition. A writ of mandate was issued directing the superior court to vacate its order denying Maas's petition for writ of habeas corpus. Thereafter, the superior court was ordered to reassign Maas's petition for writ of habeas corpus for decision by a different judge.
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.