Holmes

People v. Holmes

Good Law
130 Cal. App. 507·1933 Cal. App. LEXIS 877·20 P.2d 67
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMarch 22, 1933Docket No. 243.California906 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Barnard, J.

The defendant was charged in one information with the crime of grand theft and in another information with the crime of injuring telephone lines, in violation of section 591 of the Penal Code. On motion of the district attorney the two causes were consolidated for trial, and the defendant was found guilty of the crime of injuring telephone lines and not guilty of the crime of grand theft. From the ensuing judgment and from an order denying a new trial, the defendant has appealed.

The sole ground of appeal is that the court erred in consolidating the two actions for trial, the appellant contending that this was prejudicial to him for the reason that it is probable that he would not have been convicted if tried upon the charge of injuring telephone lines alone.

It appears from the evidence, although largely from the testimony of an accomplice named Vasquez, that both were members of the Marine Corps stationed at the Marine Base at San Diego; that Holmes, an experienced telephone operator, had ascertained that certain pay stations of the Southern California Telephone Company in San Diego were opened by the company's agents on or about the 20th of each month for the purpose of…

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.