Conover

People v. Conover

Good Law
1966 Cal. App. LEXIS 1644·243 Cal. App. 2d 38·52 Cal. Rptr. 172
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJune 22, 1966Crim. 5299California6,477 words

Opinion

Opinion

Sullivan, J.

A jury found defendant guilty of receiving stolen property (Pen. Code, § 496). He appeals from the judgment of conviction.

In the early part of 1964 Gorman Rose, who was employed as a driver of a cement mixer, accidentally met defendant with whom he had first become acquainted seven to nine years before. They stopped to talk and in the course of the conversation the subject of “chain saws” arose. Defendant told Rose that he “frequently” had the opportunity to obtain such saws and asked him “if I do [obtain them], would you be interested in some?” Rose replied that he would be interested because he wanted to cut down some trees in back of his house and also because one of his coworkers was looking for some. Hearing Rose’s interest, defendant said that “if I get hold of any, I’ll give you a ring.” Rose then gave defendant his telephone number and the men parted.

About two weeks later defendant telephoned Rose and informed the latter that he had some used chain saws to sell and asked if Rose would be interested in buying them. Rose declined, stating that he was interested only in new saws.

On April 24, 1964, the place of business of Edwin G. Baird, a chain saw dealer in Amador…

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.