Brimmage

People v. Brimmage

Good Law
182 Cal. App. 2d 66·1960 Cal. App. LEXIS 2077·5 Cal. Rptr. 661
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJune 20, 1960Crim. No. 3056California1,001 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Schottky, J.

Appellant Henry E. Brimmage and his wife, Mary Roxie Brimmage, were jointly charged by information with two counts of statutory rape and one count of attempted rape. Prior to the trial counsel for appellant made a motion for a separate trial for appellant. It was contended that it would be prejudicial to appellant if a joint trial were held because of the nature of the offenses and because evidence admissible against Mary Roxie Brimmage and not against appellant would be introduced. Appellant contended that the prejudicial effect of this testimony would not be cured by an instruction. The motion was denied by the trial judge and appellant and his wife were tried jointly. ’ Both were found guilty on all three counts, and appellant has appealed from the judgment pronounced on the jury’s verdict.

No question is raised as to the sufficiency of the evidence to support the conviction, so it is unnecessary to detail the sordid evidence relating to the acts. At the trial each of the minor female persons involved testified to the subject matter of the offenses and the surrounding circumstances. Appellant took the witness stand and admitted knowing the girls involved and that they had been…

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.