Blair

People v. Blair

Bad Law
1969 Cal. App. LEXIS 1408·2 Cal. App. 3d 249·82 Cal. Rptr. 673
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaNovember 21, 1969Crim. 3611California2,333 words

Opinion

Opinion

Mitchell, J.

The defendant was charged with; (a) robbery (Pen. Code. § 211), count I; (b) kidnaping (Pen. Code, § 209) for the purpose of robbery, count II; (c) kidnaping (Pen. Code, § 209) for the purpose of robbery, count III; and (d) receiving stolen property (Pen. Code, § 496), count IV. In a jury trial, defendant was found guilty on all four counts. The defendant appeals from the judgment and from the order denying his motion for a new trial. However, the order denying a new trial is nonappealable. (People v. De Leon, 236 Cal.App.2d 530, 533 [ 46 Cal.Rptr. 241 ]; Pen. Code, § 1237.)

The evidence disclosed that Mr. and Mrs. Susman were robbed, at their home, of currency and other valuables by an armed, masked man. The Susmans could not identify the robber. The stolen property was found by police in defendant’s home or place of employment. Also found at defend ant’s place of employment, were clothes matching the description of those worn by the robber.

Sergeant Wall, of the Palm Springs Police Department, testified to a conversation with defendant in which the latter stated that he had “thought about pulling it, [the robbery] but didn’t,” and that he knew about the robbery.

The…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.