Rowland

People v. Rowland

Good Law
1968 Cal. App. LEXIS 2370·262 Cal. App. 2d 790·69 Cal. Rptr. 269
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJune 7, 1968Crim. 13762California2,654 words

Opinion

Opinion

Aiso, J.

Defendant Arnold Franklin Rowland was convicted of an assault with a deadly weapon (Pen. Code, § 245) by a court, sitting without a jury. Sentenced to state prison, he appeals from the judgment of conviction.

Appellant’s Contentions

The crux of the defendant’s contentions of error is that by erroneous exclusion of relevant evidence, the trial court thwarted his counsel’s attempt to put on an adequate defense. The theory of the defense was that defendant was warding off a homosexual advance by the alleged victim and prosecution witness, Leon Frieke, and that the gun was accidentally discharged by Frieke’s grabbing it. The line of questioning stopped by the trial court consisted of attempts to elicit testimony from a defense witness.that Fricke was an aggressive homosexual as relevant to a claim of acting in self-defense.

The Evidence

Leon Fricke, the prosecuting witness, testified to the following : He lived in Altadena and worked as a barber at People’s Barber Shop, located at 2279 North Lake in Altadena. He was married and the father of three children. On the evening in question, August 23, 1966, he had not been drinking. Shortly after midnight, he drove down to a pizza…

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.