Lorenson v. Superior Court in and for Los Angeles County
Decision Date | 04 April 1950 |
Docket Number | No. L,L |
Citation | 35 Cal.2d 49,216 P.2d 859 |
Parties | . A. 21155. Supreme Court of California, in Bank |
Court | California Supreme Court |
Russell E. Parsons, Los Angeles, for petitioner.
Harold W. Kennedy, County Counsel, Wm. E. Lamoreaux, Deputy County Counsel, W. E. Simpson, District Atty., Jere J. Sullivan and Robert Wheeler, Deputy District Attys., Los Angeles, for respondent.
Harry M. Lorenson and twelve other persons were indicted for conspiracy to commit robbery, to commit assault with a deadly weapon and to pervert or obstruct justice or the due administration of the laws. The present proceeding to restrain the Superior Court, by writ of prohibition, from proceeding with the trial of the action, is prosecuted chiefly upon the ground that there was insufficient evidence before the grand jury to show that Lorenson committed any crime.
From the testimony presented to the grand jury, it appears that Alfred Pearson was the principal employee of the Sky Pilot Radio Shop located in a residential district of Los Angeles. His general reputation as an unreliable business man was not bettered by newspaper publicity to the effect that he had obtained title to the home of a Mrs. Phillips by legal proceedings arising out of a controversy over a repair bill of less than $10. The accounts of his dealings with Mrs. Phillips, coupled with stories of his assertedly unfair business practices in other transactions, had brought about a general wave of indignation in the neighborhood.
For some time prior to Pearson's difficulties with Mrs. Phillips, Lorenson, a captain in the Police Department of Los Angeles, had been assigned to duty with the Police Commission. He had directed the arrest and prosecution of Pearson on several criminal charges. Pearson was acquitted in each of these cases with the exception of one in which he was fined $500 for a violation of the federal law administered by the Office of Price Administration.
Each man intensely disliked the other. At one time Pearson sued Lorenson and several other persons, claiming damages because of an asserted conspiracy to ruin his business. Lorenson made no effort to conceal his ill will toward Pearson and repeatedly voiced his hatred and enmity toward the radio man.
'Mickey' Cohen is a shadowy character in this picture of the situation at the time of the events which are the basis for the challenged indictment. According to testimony presented to the grand jury, Cohen is a well known hoodlum of Los Angeles and a generally nefarious character. The indictment is based upon evidence tending to show that Lorenson interested himself in Mrs. Phillips' difficulties with Pearson and enlisted as aids in his purpose to help her, and punish Pearson, a lawyer and seven of 'Mickey's' henchmen.
The overt acts of Lorenson and those indicted with him took place within about 24 hours before a severe beating of Pearson on a Saturday afternoon. The story commences with a conversation between Lorenson and Jerome Weber, an attorney, which took place the previous morning. See Weber v. Superior Court, Cal.Sup., 216 P.2d 871. At that time, Lorenson asked Weber whether he would represent Mrs. Phillips in a suit to set aside the sale of her home to Pearson. When Weber agreed to act as her attorney, Lorenson stated that he would talk with Mrs. Phillips and make an investigation for the purpose of obtaining facts to be used in the prosecution of the action.
Lorenson then went to the Wilshire Police Station and discussed Mrs. Phillips' case with Acting Captain Swan. While commenting upon Pearson, Swan remarked that if Pearson came to the Wilshire Station he would be thrown down the stairs. Lorenson then called upon Mrs. Phillips, telling her he was sure her home could be recovered and that Jerome Weber would do the legal work without charge. Lorenson then saw Weber, who said he would take the case without fee.
In the afternoon, Lorenson received a telephone call from an unknown person who told him that there would be pickets in front of Pearson's store the next day carrying banners stating in substance: Lorenson made no official report of this coinversation.
On the following morning, James Rist, one of Cohen's associates, ordered four signs painted with wording to the effect that Pearson had taken a widow's home for a.$9.00 repair bill. The signs were delivered to Rist about 10 a. m. of that day.
Less than one hour later, Rist with David Ogul visited the radio shop and asked for Pearson. He was not there. Wehn they found him in the shop about 2:30 p. m., they told him that they represented a magazine and wished to hear his version of the controversy between him and Mrs. Phillips. As they were unable to identify themselves, Pearson ordered them to leave. When Rist objected, Pearson threatened to call the police, stating at the same time that a recording had been made of their conversation. Ogul and Rist then left.
At 3:15 p. m., Pearson received a telephone call from someone who represented himself as the editor of a Los Angeles newspaper. The supposed editor apologized for conduct of Ogul and Rist, stated that they were reporters for his paper and requested an interview on their behalf. Pearson agreed to an interview with the same or other reporters. As was his custom, Pearson made a recording of this conversation.
About 30 minutes later, Rist and Ogul, with Eli Lubin and another person, returned to the radio shop. One of the men carried a camera. Pearson informed them of the conversation with the editor and said that he would give them an interview. He then played a portion of the recorded telephone conversation for them. When Pearson invited the four men behind a partition where the recording device was located, without any warning, they beat him about the head and body with a gun, clubs, iron rods and other heavy objects. Pearson's arm was broken and his head cut in five places. They tore telephones from the wall and after taking the machine which contained the record of the conversation with the 'editor', made their escape in an automobile which was double-parked in front of the store.
Because of a minor traffic violation, officers in a passing patrol car gave chase. Tire irons, a gun, and a riding crop were thrown from the speeding car. In response to a radio call for assistance, four police cars responded. When the automobile was overtaken, the officers found that it had seven occupants, Rist, Ogul and Lubin, Frank Niccoli, Louis Schwartz, Harold Meltzer, and Edward Herbert, all associates of Cohen. After the men were arrested and while they were being searched, an amateur photograher took pictures of the party. The officers with their prisoners arrived at the Wilshire Station about 4:25 p. m.
At approximately 4:10 p. m., which places the conversation just at the time of the beating of Pearson and the pursuit of the men who had attacked him, Jerome Weber called the Wilshire Station and asked if anyone had been arrested in connection with a disturbance at Pearson's place of business. Upon being informed by Officer Barkley that no such person had been brought in, Weber requested that the booking of any one arrested on that charge be delayed until he had arrived at the station. Burton Mold, see Mold v. Superior Court, Cal.Sup., 216 P.2d 874, interrupted Weber's conversation and asked Barkley, to whom he was known, if Dave Ogul and two others, whom he named, had been arrested because of a disturbance of the peace or a fight. When he was told that they were not at the station, Mold asked Barkley to extend every courtesy to Weber, as he and Weber were very good friends.
Just before Weber and Mold were talking with Barkley, Lorenson received a telephone call at his home from a man who identified himself as a newspaper reporter. Lorenson stated that he thought that his caller gave the name of Beacon or Bacon, but no reporter having either name was ever located. The alleged reporter asked Lorenson, 'Have you heard about any trouble out at Pearson's, the Sky Pilot radio repair man?' Lorenson replied that he had not, and the supposed reporter said, 'I understand he got beat up and they took him to the station.' According to the testimony of Lorenson fixing the time of this conversation, it occurred before the seven arrested men reached the station. No report of the incident had then been made by the arresting officers. Lorenson then called the Wilshire Station and spoke to the Desk Sergeant and Officer Shea of the Detective Bureau. After asking Shea if any arrests had been made of pickets at Pearson's radio shop, Lorenson said, 'It would be too bad if some pickets got in trouble by being pushed around or getting pushed around at Pearson's place.'
Within a few minutes after the arrested men arrived at the Wilshire Station, Acting Captain Swan, with whom Lorenson had discussed the Pearson case on the day before, called from his home concerning the arrest. When he was informed that arrests had been made, Swan had the names of the men read to him, and asked if they had any connection with the Sky Pilot Radio Shop. He was told that the arrests concerned Pearson's business. Swan then gave instructions to immediately elease the prisoners and get them out of the station without attracting attention before Pearson could arive to identify any of them.
In this conversation Swan directed that the tire irons, guns, recording device, and other objects which had been turned in as evidence, be returned to the prisoners. He also ordered Officer Wolfe, on duty at Wilshire Station, to caution the arresting officers not to talk about the incident. Wolfe accordingly informed those officers that they should destroy their notes concerning the arrest, say nothing about the incident and, if questioned, deny that an arrest had been made. Wolfe told...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Whitney v. Municipal Court of City and County of San Francisco
...long usage, or the common law meaning even though the definition may have undergone a slight degree of change. (Lorenson v. Superior Court (1950) 35 Cal.2d 49, 216 P.2d 859; People v. McCaughan (1957) 49 Cal.2d 409, 414, 317 P.2d 974; Sultan Turkish Bath v. Police Comrs. (1959) 169 Cal.App.......
-
People v. Andrews
...been committed in which the defendant had participated. (Weber v. Superior Court, 35 Cal.2d 68, 69, 216 P.2d 871; Lorenson v. Superior Court, 35 Cal.2d 49, 55, 216 P.2d 859.) In the present appeal we are concerned with the question whether or not the evidence was sufficient to sustain the j......
-
People v. Hardeman
...section have been consistently overruled. (Calhoun v. Superior Court (1955) 46 Cal.2d 18, 31, 291 P.2d 474; Lorenson v. Superior Court (1950) 35 Cal.2d 49, 59--61, 216 P.2d 859; Davis v. Superior Court (1959) 175 Cal.App.2d 8, 13--17, 345 P.2d 513; People v. Sullivan (1952) 113 Cal.App.2d 5......
-
Castro v. Superior Court
...justification for the rule is said to derive from the secrecy which attends the formation of most conspiracies. (Lorenson v. Superior Court, 35 Cal.2d 49, 57--58, 216 P.2d 859; People v. Hobson, 255 Cal.App.2d 557, 561--562, 63 Cal.Rptr. 320; cf. Grunewald v. United States, 353 U.S. 391, 40......