Diaz

People v. Diaz

Good Law
160 Cal. App. 2d 123·1958 Cal. App. LEXIS 2102·324 P.2d 887
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMay 6, 1958Crim. 5856California3,779 words

Opinion

Opinion

White, J.

In an information filed by the district attorney of Los Angeles County, the above named defendants * were charged in three counts with the crime of robbery. The basis for the three counts involved the presence of three people at the time of the robbery and from each of whom money was taken by force and through fear upon the part of the victims. The three defendants pleaded not guilty, waived trial by jury and were, by the court, found guilty as charged in the three counts. The court found the crime to be robbery of the first degree. Defendant Munoz’s motion for a new trial was denied and he was sentenced to state prison. From the judgment of conviction and the order denying his motion for a new trial, defendant Munoz prosecutes this appeal.

The following is a fair statement of the factual background surrounding this prosecution. On April 24, 1956, Carl Smith, his wife Helen Smith, and Carl’s brother, Clifford Smith, were residing together in a house at Harbor City, in Los Angeles County. Mrs. Smith had retired shortly after 9 p.m., and Carl and Clifford Smith were watching television in the living room of their home. In addition to the light emanating from the television screen,…

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.