Vigil

People v. Vigil

Good Law
179 Cal. App. 2d 182·1960 Cal. App. LEXIS 2217·3 Cal. Rptr. 479
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMarch 24, 1960Crim. No. 6808California1,771 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Vallée, J.

In a nonjury trial defendant was convicted of procuring an abortion. She was sentenced to the institution for women and appeals from the judgment. Her points are that the evidence is insufficient to sustain the judgment and there was insufficient corroboration of the testimony of the prosecutrix.

On May 14, 1958, Mary Lou Samaniego was told by a physician she was pregnant. She was in good health and knew no reason why she could not have a normal childbirth. She had missed three menstrual periods and was “getting large.” That evening she met defendant in the Golondrina Café in Pacoima and asked her to “give” an abortion and that she “was hard in disposing of babies.” She asked defendant if she would do it for $50. Defendant said she would do it. Later that evening Mary Lou gave defendant $50. *184 Defendant told her to come to her house the following night, which she did. Defendant had her go into a bedroom, take off her capris and underclothing, and lie on a rug on the floor. Defendant inserted a syringe into Mary Lou’s vagina and moved her around so that it would go into the cervix or womb. She felt a liquid go into her and felt pain. During this time a pan was on the floor…

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.