Does the Attorney General have any basis to argue that petitioner is guilty of laches?

It is not denied that those allegations, if true and if appropriately raised at this time and in this proceeding, entitle petitioner to relief. (People v. Wadkins (1965) 63 Cal.2d 110, 113--114, 45 Cal.Rptr. 173, 403 P.2d 429.) The argument made to us by the Attorney General is: (1) that petitioner is guilty of laches, in that he did not raise the present matters until his abortive coram nobis petition in 1967--twenty months after his plea of guilty; and (2) that his remedy is a motion in municipal court to set aside his plea of guilty. We conclude: (1) that the interests of justice require that petitioner be given relief in this court, where his appeal from the section 6327 order is pending; and (2) that the issue of laches should be decided in the same evidentiary hearing that we direct on the allegations of his petition.