Sandow

People v. Sandow

Good Law
133 Cal. App. 559·1933 Cal. App. LEXIS 655·24 P.2d 521
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJuly 31, 1933Docket No. 89.California822 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Turpentine, J.

Defendant was convicted of burglary and the appeal is from the judgments of conviction and order denying a new trial. It appears from the evidence that defendant resided at the home of one Mrs. Briney, who was the mother of one James Lankford. The defendant and James Lankford occupied the same room in the Briney home. Lankford testified that he and the defendant entered four different garages after night and that each took from the garages certain personal property which they took to the room which he and the defendant were occupying. Among other things that the witness and defendant took were a hack-saw and Stillson wrench. The defendant had a small sewing-machine motor which he told Lankford he obtained from one garage, stating there were other tools there and they went together to this garage and got the tools. At no time did they have permission to enter the garages or obtain the property. James Lankford is an admitted accomplice. It was proper to prove the corpus delicti by the accomplice. (People v. Richardson, 161 Cal. 552, 563 [ 120 Pac. 20 ]; People v. Frazer, 80 Cal. App. 464, 468 [ 252 Pac. 633 ].) Defendant attacks the judgments on (a) errors in instructions to the…

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.