## Facts

- Jean Jett owned “Rocky,” a 50-year-old Aldabra tortoise used in a petting-zoo operation.
- After cruelty complaints, the San Diego Humane Society found Rocky in poor condition (including infected eyes, shell damage, dehydration, and labored breathing) and took custody to provide treatment.
- The Society asserted a statutory lien for care costs under Penal Code § 597f.
- A municipal court jury convicted Jett of misdemeanors under Penal Code § 597(b) (needless suffering) and § 597f (lack of proper care), and acquitted him on a separate local code count.
- At sentencing, Jett refused probation; the municipal court imposed a fine and ordered Jett to relinquish ownership of Rocky to Mesa College, and denied Jett’s motion for Rocky’s return.
- The municipal court later issued an order placing Rocky with Mesa College subject to the Society’s § 597f lien; Rocky remained there.
- Jett appealed his criminal conviction to the superior court appellate department and separately petitioned for a writ of mandate in superior court to compel return of Rocky; the superior court denied the petition.
- Jett appealed the mandamus denial to the Court of Appeal.

## Issues

1. Whether a pending criminal appeal barred a separate mandamus proceeding seeking return of property affected by the criminal case.
2. Whether the municipal court had statutory authority to order forfeiture or transfer of ownership of the tortoise to a third party as part of sentencing under Penal Code §§ 597(b), 597f, or § 599aa.
3. Whether the order denying return of the tortoise was appealable, and if not, whether mandamus was an available remedy.

## Decision

- The Court of Appeal reversed the superior court’s denial of the writ petition and directed issuance of a writ.
- The court held that Jett’s pending criminal appeal did not bar him from pursuing an action to recover the tortoise.
- The court held the order denying return of the tortoise was not appealable and could be reviewed by mandamus (or by a separate civil action to recover property).
- The court held the municipal court lacked statutory authority to order permanent forfeiture or transfer of ownership of the tortoise to Mesa College as part of sentencing on these charges.
- The court directed the municipal court to vacate its order denying return of the tortoise and proceed consistently with the opinion, while recognizing the Humane Society’s valid § 597f lien for reimbursement of care costs.

## Legal Principles

- A defendant’s appeal from a criminal conviction does not necessarily preclude a separate proceeding to recover property when the challenged property order is not itself appealable in the criminal case.
- When an order affecting property rights in a criminal matter is not appealable, mandamus may be used to obtain review, and a civil action for recovery of property may also be available.
- Penal Code § 597f authorizes humane-society custody of neglected animals and provides a lien for care costs; it does not, by itself, authorize a criminal court to divest an owner of title and transfer ownership to a third party.
- Forfeiture as part of a criminal sentence requires clear statutory authorization; courts may not create forfeiture remedies by analogy (including to family-law concepts) or by extending inapplicable forfeiture statutes (such as provisions aimed at animal-fighting offenses).

## Conclusion

The Court of Appeal required mandamus relief because the nonappealable order denying return of the tortoise could not stand: the municipal court could protect the Humane Society’s statutory lien for care, but it lacked statutory power to order permanent forfeiture or transfer of the animal’s ownership to Mesa College as part of sentencing for convictions under Penal Code §§ 597(b) and 597f.


Jett v. Municipal Court, 177 Cal. App. 3d 664, 223 Cal. Rptr. 111 (Cal. Ct. App. 1986)