57 Cal.App. 449, Cr. 907, People v. Whitney

Docket Nº:Cr. 907.
Citation:57 Cal.App. 449, 207 P. 698
Opinion Judge:RICHARDS, J.
Party Name:PEOPLE v. WHITNEY.
Attorney:Nathan C. Coghlan, John Francis Neylan, and J. E. Pemberton, all of San Francisco (William F. Herron, of San Francisco, of counsel), for appellant. U. S. Webb, Atty. Gen., John H. Riordan, Deputy Atty. Gen., Ezra W. Decoto, Dist. Atty., John U. Calkins, Asst. Dist. Atty., and Myron Harris, Deputy...
Judge Panel:We concur: TYLER, P. J.; KERRIGAN, J.
Case Date:April 25, 1922
Court:California Court of Appeals

Page 449

57 Cal.App. 449

207 P. 698

PEOPLE

v.

WHITNEY.

Cr. 907.

District Court of Appeals of California, First District, First Division

April 25, 1922

Appeal from Superior Court, Alameda County; James G. Quinn, Judge.

Page 450

Nathan C. Coghlan, John Francis Neylan, and J. E. Pemberton, all of San Francisco (William F. Herron, of San Francisco, of counsel), for appellant.

U. S. Webb, Atty. Gen., John H. Riordan, Deputy Atty. Gen., Ezra W. Decoto, Dist. Atty., John U. Calkins, Asst. Dist. Atty., and Myron Harris, Deputy Dist. Atty., all of Oakland, for the People.

RICHARDS, J.

This appeal is from a judgment of conviction of the defendant for the alleged violation of the provisions of the Criminal Syndicalism Act (St. 1919, p. 281). The information filed by the district attorney against the defendant consisted of five separate counts based upon the several subdivisions of said act. The jury found the defendant guilty as to the first count in the information, but disagreed as to the other counts therein, and dismissals as to these were subsequently filed. The charging part of the first count in said information upon which the conviction of the defendant was had is in the language of the statute and reads as follows:

" The said Charlotte A. Whitney prior to the time of filing this information, and on or about the 28th day of November, A. D. 1919, at the said county of Alameda, state of California, did then and there unlawfully, willfully, wrongfully, deliberately, and feloniously organize and assist in organizing, and was, is, and knowingly became a member of an organization, society, group, and assemblage of persons organized and assembled to advocate, teach, aid, and abet criminal syndicalism."

The first contention of the appellant herein is that said first count in said indictment, of which the foregoing excerpt

Page 451

is the charging part, was insufficient to state a public offense; the alleged particular insufficiency therein being its omission to specifically designate the name of the organization, society, group, or assemblage of persons which she is charged with having organized and assisted in organizing and which were organized and assembled to teach, aid, and abet criminal syndicalism. Since the original submission of this cause the Supreme Court has decided the case of People v. Taylor (Cal. Sup.) 203 P. 85, covering the precise point which the appellant urges upon this contention. The two cases are identical as to the...

To continue reading

FREE SIGN UP