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. WILLIAMS et al.
PEOPLE v. GREEN.
The defendant was convicted of four counts of first degree robbery. Two cases, each with two counts against him were consolidated for trial. Defendant and his counsel waived trial by jury; upon stipulation of the district attorney and counsel for defendant, part of the testimony considered by the trial court was the reporter's transcript of the evidence on the preliminary examination before the committing magistrate.
The convictions were based upon positive identification of the defendant by the victims of the several robberies.
Defendant appeals from the judgments of conviction.
Certain inconsistencies in the testimony of witnesses for the People are urged as grounds for reversal of the case.
The trial court resolved these against the defendant. Defendant also argues that his testimony denying all of the evidence against him should have been believed by the court. This conflict likewise was resolved against him by the trier of fact.
A review of the record discloses substantial evidence to support the judgments. People v. Klinkenberg, 90 Cal.App.2d 608, 204 P.2d 47; People v. Warnick, 86 Cal.App.2d 900, 195 P.2d 552; People v. Lindley, 26 Cal.2d 780, 791, 161 P.2d 227; People v. Newland, 15 Cal.2d 678, 681, 104 P.2d 778; People v. Hills, 30 Cal.2d 694, 701, 185 P.2d 11; People v. Smith, 35 Cal.App.2d 73, 76, 94 P.2d 633.
The judgments are, and each of them is, affirmed. The purported appeals from the sentences are dismissed.
DRAPEAU, Justice.
WHITE, P. J., and DORAN, J., concur.
Thank you for your feedback!
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.
Docket No: Cr. 4279, 4280.
Decided: April 21, 1949
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)