Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
PEOPLE v. DAVIS.
The appeals herein involve two actions. In one the defendant pleaded guilty to the information alleging the offense of burglary. In the other the defendant was charged in two counts with ‘grand theft from the person’ and, following a trial by the court was adjudged guilty as charged.
Following the plea of guilty of burglary a request to file an application for probation was granted; such permission was also granted after defendant's conviction in the grand theft action. Time for the hearing thereon and the pronouncing of judgment was set for May 25 as to both cases. On said date a motion to substitute attorneys for defendant was granted and a motion to withdraw the plea of guilty to the burglary information was denied. Application for probation was denied and judgment pronounced.
The appeal is from the judgments, the order denying the application for change of plea, the order denying a motion for a new trial, and the orders denying the application for probation.
The contention on appeal is ‘That the judgment of the court is contrary to the law and evidence’.
Each of the grand theft offenses was committed in an automobile at night. The act amounted to what is generally referred to as ‘pickpocket’. Appellant's argument is in substance to the effect that the evidence of identification is insufficient. The defendant is a Negro and one of the victims testified, ‘Well, I thought she was Spanish; she was speaking with a Spanish dialect’. The other victim testified, ‘She was rattling off, and she impressed me as a Spanish person when she started talking.’ It is upon this testimony together with descriptions as to height that appellant bases the argument that evidence of identity is insufficient.
Without going into details, it is sufficient to note that the witnesses' testimony as to the identity of defendant was sufficient; the evidence supports the judgment and there are no errors in the record.
The judgments and orders are affirmed; the attempted appeals from the orders made before judgment are dismissed.
DORAN, Justice.
YORK, P. J., and WHITE, J., concur.
A free source of state and federal court opinions, state laws, and the United States Code. For more information about the legal concepts addressed by these cases and statutes visit FindLaw's Learn About the Law.
Docket No: Cr. 4265, 4266.
Decided: December 23, 1948
Court: District Court of Appeal, Second District, Division 1, California.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)