BROWN (Gerald), P.J.
Lloyd William Sahley appeals the judgment on the pleadings dismissing his complaint against the County of San Diego for injuries suffered when he slipped and fell in a shower at the county jail.
(1) Since he was a preconviction detainee at the time of his fall, Sahley argues he was not a "prisoner" and his suit is not barred by sovereign immunity.
The doctrine of governmental immunity, which exempts governmental agencies from having to answer for their torts, has a long and varied history. Most recently in California, the Supreme Court abolished the rule ( Muskopf v. Corning Hospital Dist., 55 Cal.2d 211 [ 11 Cal.Rptr. 89, 359 P.2d 457]), only to have the Legislature reinstate it with the Governmental Tort Claims Act of 1963. Government Code section 844.6 says in part:
"(a) Notwithstanding any other provision of this part, except as provided in this section and in Sections 814, 814.2, 845.4, and 845.6, a public entity is not liable for:
". . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
"(2) An injury to any prisoner."
A "`prisoner' includes an inmate of a prison, jail or penal or correctional facility" (Gov. Code, § 844). The Legislative Committee comment on this section includes as prisoners persons in the custody of a law enforcement officer although undergoing medical treatment in a county hospital, those in work camps and those engaged in fire suppression; parolees are not. From case law, the deprivation of liberty by lawful process or some kind of involuntary restraint characterizes one's status as a prisoner or inmate ( Patricia J. v. Rio Linda Union Sch. Dist., 61 Cal.App.3d 278, 283 [ 132 Cal.Rptr. 211]; Jiminez v. County of Santa Cruz, 42 Cal.App.3d 407, 410 [ 116 Cal.Rptr. 878]; Larson v. City of Oakland, 17 Cal.App.3d 91, 96 [ 94 Cal.Rptr. 466]; Datil v. City of Los Angeles, 263 Cal.App.2d 655, 658 [ 69 Cal.Rptr. 788]). Thus, a person who has been booked is considered a prisoner ( Datil v. City of Los Angeles, supra, 263 Cal.App.2d 655, 659) while persons who have been temporarily detained for investigation ( Larson v. City of Oakland, supra, 17 Cal.App.3d 91, 97), juveniles who are wards of the court but in custody of their parents ( Patricia J. v. Rio Linda Union Sch. Dist., supra, 61 Cal.App.3d 278, 287), and persons falsely imprisoned beyond the term of their prison sentences are not ( Sullivan v. County of Los Angeles, 12 Cal.3d 710, 715 [ 117 Cal.Rptr. 241, 527 P.2d 865]). Here, Sahley was a preconviction detainee awaiting trial; he had been booked and arraigned; he was a "prisoner" for purposes of governmental immunity (see Datil v. City of Los Angeles, supra, 263 Cal.App.2d 655).
Judgment affirmed.
Cologne, J., and Staniforth, J., concurred.
A petition for a rehearing was denied May 12, 1977.