People v. Gonzales

The defendant was charged by information with having violated the so-called Firearms Act of June 13, 1923 (Stats. 1923, p. 696), which reads as follows:

A jury having found the defendant guilty as charged, a motion for new trial was denied, and this is an appeal from the judgment and order denying said motion. It is contended in appellant’s behalf that there was no evi dence; other than a purported confession which was introduced over his objection, that he was an unnaturalized foreign-born person, and that the trial court erred in permitting the introduction of such confession without requiring the prosecution to establish the corpus delicti. „ It is insisted on behalf of the People that the evidence sufficiently showed the defendant’s birth and the fact that he was not naturalized in this country, before testimony as to any alleged confession was offered.

There is no contention that the appellant was not armed, as alleged, at the time of his arrest. The only evidence which in any way tended to show that he was an unnaturalized foreign-born person consisted of the testimony of various witnesses that appellant spoke the Mexican or Spanish language/’and that he could not speak…