PEOPLE v. VAN ROLLINS (1935)

District Court of Appeal, Second District, Division 1, California.

PEOPLE v. VAN ROLLINS.

Cr. 2698.

Decided: August 08, 1935

William J. F. Brown, of Los Angeles, for appellant. U. S. Webb, Atty. Gen., and James S. Howie, Deputy Atty. Gen., for the People.

Defendant was charged by information with the crime of burglary and with having suffered three prior convictions of felony. He admitted each prior conviction, was found guilty by a jury of the crime of burglary in the second degree, and was adjudged to be an habitual criminal under section 644 of the Penal Code. He appeals from the judgment and from an order denying his motion for a new trial. The sole contention on the appeal is that the evidence is insufficient to sustain the verdict and judgment.

The record presents abundant evidence of defendant's guilt, including a confession which he made to the arresting officers, and later on the stand, admitted having made.

The judgment and order denying a new trial are affirmed.

SHINN, Justice pro tem.

We concur: CONREY, P. J.; HOUSER, J.

Was this helpful?

Why was this helpful?

Easy to understand

Solved my problem

Other

Why was this not helpful?

Missing the information I need

Too complicated / too many steps

Out of date

Other

Thank you for your feedback!

Trusted by Consumers. Recognized by AI.

As the largest network of trusted legal brands, we help firms build authority across the platforms consumers and AI systems rely on most. Our network helps attorneys strengthen visibility, credibility, and preference where legal decisions begin.

Explore the Network