Rojas

People v. Rojas

Good Law
1963 Cal. App. LEXIS 2090·216 Cal. App. 2d 819·31 Cal. Rptr. 417
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJune 4, 1963Crim. 8662California3,800 words

Opinion

Opinion

Lillie, J.

In 1959, the court found Rojas and Hidalgo guilty of receiving stolen property (Pen. Code, § 496). Hidalgo, who operated an electrical contracting business, purchased certain electrical equipment knowing it to be stolen; Rojas was arrested unloading it from the truck. The original probation reports reveal that Rojas “was somewhat a victim of circumstances,” but that Hidalgo, who was under suspicion by police for a long time, engaged in past illegal activities and had several prior misdemeanor convictions. Rojas was granted probation for five years on the condition he spend the first 180 days in the county jail; Hidalgo was denied probation and sentenced to the state prison.

Both defendants appealed. The Supreme Court reduced the offense from receiving stolen property to attempting to receive stolen property, reversed the judgment and order, and remanded the cause for further proceedings with “directions to enter such lawful judgment or order agaiúst each defendant, based on the modified finding, as the court deems appropriate.” (People v. Rojas, 55 Cal.2d 252, 261 [ 10 Cal.Rptr. 465 , 358 P.2d 921 ].)

On remittitur, the cause again came before the same judge who, after…

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.