Beasley

People v. Beasley

Good Law
250 Cal. App. 2d 71
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaApril 13, 1967Crim. No. 5309California2,928 words

Opinion

Opinion

The People appeal from an order setting aside an information (Pen. Code, 995) and from a certain order suppressing evidence.

Following a preliminary hearing commencing November 18, 1964, at which defendants were held to answer a charge of receiving stolen property, the District Attorney of Contra Costa County, on December 4, 1964, filed a two-count information charging that defendants Beasley and Reed did, on or about August 28, 1964, burglarize premises located at 588 Spring Street, Richmond, California; and (in the alternative) did buy and receive certain property, i.e., a Miller Falls saw and an Olivetti calculator, which had been stolen, and which were known by them to have been stolen.

The facts as developed at the preliminary examination are essentially without dispute.

Edward L. Ridgel, a concrete contractor, operated a place of business at 588 Spring Street, Richmond, California. When he went to this place of business on the morning of August 28, 1964, he found the door to his office broken down. This was an inner door since the office was enclosed in a large metal building. The metal siding had been ripped away from the building in two different places.…

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.