Cheaney

People v. Cheaney

Good Law
111 Cal. App. 55·1931 Cal. App. LEXIS 1067·295 P. 84
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJanuary 8, 1931Docket No. 2030.California1,069 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Craig, J.

At about 9 o’clock at night on June 12, 1927, the occupants of an automobile were accosted by a highwayman on the public streets of the city of Los Angeles, who deprived them of a watch, a diamond ring, about $10 in money, and their car. About three years thereafter the appellant was apprehended and charged by information with the theft of the watch and the ring, of which a jury found him guilty. He has appealed from the judgment and from- an order denying a motion for a new trial.

It appears that on the evening mentioned a lady and her escort were sitting in a black Auburn sedan in front of her residence on St. Andrews Place, in said city, when a man appeared, pointed a revolver at them, and demanded that they “drive on”; that he entered the rear seat, menacing them with the weapon, ejected them from the car, and drove away. The automobile, watch and ring were recovered, and the jewelry was identified by the owners during the trial. They testified that their assailant was of medium height, wore a light overcoat, Panama hat, and had a mustache, but were unable to swear that the defendant was the same person. A Mrs. Mae Dye, who testified that she had known the defendant for a…

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.