People v. Wilson

THE PEOPLE, Respondent, v. E. D. WILSON, Appellant.

COUNSEL

William J. F. Brown for Appellant.

U.S. Webb, Attorney-General, and Frank Richards, Deputy Attorney-General, for Respondent.

OPINION

Barnard, P. J.

The defendant, after conviction on a charge of driving a vehicle on a public highway while under the influence of intoxicating liquor, has attempted to appeal and the respondent has moved to dismiss the appeal.

[1] When the verdict was entered counsel for appellant stated that he was giving oral notice of appeal. This notice was premature and without effect. (People v. Ward, 138 Cal. 684 [72 P. 343]; People v. Hill, 1 Cal. App. 414 [82 P. 398].) [2] Thereafter judgment was entered, no notice of appeal being then given. Five days later, a written notice of appeal from the judgment and from an order denying a motion for a new trial was filed. This notice was too late and was ineffectual for any purpose. (Sec. 1239, Pen. [7 Cal. App. 2d 544] Code; People v. Lewis, 219 Cal. 410 [27 PaCal.2d 73]; People v. Sullivan, 123 Cal. App. 436 [11 PaCal.2d 420]; People v. Payne, 106 Cal. App. 609 [289 P. 909].)

The motion is granted and the appeal is dismissed.

Marks, J., and Harden, J., pro tem., concurred.