Martin v. People, No. 24667
| Docket Nº | No. 24667 |
| Citation | 179 Colo. 237, 499 P.2d 606 |
| Case Date | July 31, 1972 |
| Court | Supreme Court of Colorado |
Page 606
v.
The PEOPLE of the State of Colorado, Defendant in Error.
[179 Colo. 238]
Page 607
Rollie R. Rogers, Colo. State Public Defender, J. D. MacFarlane, Chief Deputy State Public Defender, Kenneth J. Russell, Deputy State Public Defender, Denver, for plaintiff in error.Duke W. Dunbar, Atty. Gen., John P. Moore, Deputy Atty. Gen., E. Ronald Beeks, Asst. Atty. Gen., Denver, for defendant in error.
[179 Colo. 239] KELLEY, Justice.
William Clarence Martin is here on writ of error challenging the correctness of his conviction of attempted theft.
The nature of the transaction, which resulted in the institution of the charge of attempted theft against the defendant, was established by the testimony of the alleged intended victims--Mullaney and McMahill. According to these two witnesses they were under the impression, by virtue of the conduct and statements of the defendant, that he was Willie Davis of the Los Angeles Dodgers. The essence of their testimony was that 'Davis' had some 'entertainment centers' and television sets at the air freight terminal of TWA Airlines at Stapleton Airport, Denver. These applicances had been shipped to him from Los Angeles. However, in order to get delivery of them required the payment of $1,200 in C.O.D. charges. The complaining witnesses agreed to pay the $1,200 to TWA and in return they were to each receive an 'entertainment center' and sufficient merchandise to reimburse them for the C.O.D. money advanced by them.
The transaction was never consummated. Although a Denver Police Department detective, in the course of an investigation, contacted TWA and Acme Fast Freight (a common carrier that was to deliver the C.O.D. merchandise), as well as a California appliance store, there is nothing in the record to indicate whether the C.O.D. appliances actually existed. It therefore would be pure speculation for the jury to conclude that the television sets, consigned to the defendant, were not, in fact, at the TWA terminal.
At the close of the testimony and in his motion for acquittal or, in the alternative, for a new trial, the defendant challenged the sufficiency of the evidence to support the conviction of attempted theft, which the court, in each instance, denied. Because we agree with the defendant's contention, other alleged errors entitling him to a reversal will...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
People v. Gonzales, No. 25794
...the Corpus delicti must be corroborated independently of the confession. People v. Maestes, Colo., 517 P.2d 461 (1973); Martin v. People, 179 Colo. 237, 499 P.2d 606 (1972) and cases cited therein. The corroboration may be either direct or Here, a brief reference to the facts set out previo......
-
Lloyd A. Fry Roofing Co. v. State Dept. of Health Air Pollution Variance Bd., No. 25359
...66--31--3(2). In formulating emission control regulations, under the provisions of Sections 66--31--8(1)(b) through (h) the commission[179 Colo. 237] must '(b) The state policy regarding air pollution * * * '(c) Federal recommendations; '(d) The degree to which the concentrations of certain......
-
People v. Martinez, No. 98CA2518.
...interference of some cause preventing the carrying out of the intent, would have resulted in commission of the crime. Martin v. People, 179 Colo. 237, 499 P.2d 606 (1972). The overt act need not be the last proximate act necessary to complete the offense. People v. Young, 694 P.2d 841 A sub......
-
People v. Applegate, No. 25270
...deviated from the necessity to show 'some real and not imaginary' independent evidence of the Corpus delicti. See Martin v. People, Colo., 499 P.2d 606; Owen v. People, 155 Colo. 19, 392 P.2d 163; Meredith v. People, 152 Colo. 69, 380 P.2d 227; Williams v. People, 114 Colo. 207, 158 P.2d Ex......
-
People v. Gonzales, No. 25794
...the Corpus delicti must be corroborated independently of the confession. People v. Maestes, Colo., 517 P.2d 461 (1973); Martin v. People, 179 Colo. 237, 499 P.2d 606 (1972) and cases cited therein. The corroboration may be either direct or Here, a brief reference to the facts set out previo......
-
Lloyd A. Fry Roofing Co. v. State Dept. of Health Air Pollution Variance Bd., No. 25359
...66--31--3(2). In formulating emission control regulations, under the provisions of Sections 66--31--8(1)(b) through (h) the commission[179 Colo. 237] must '(b) The state policy regarding air pollution * * * '(c) Federal recommendations; '(d) The degree to which the concentrations of certain......
-
People v. Martinez, No. 98CA2518.
...interference of some cause preventing the carrying out of the intent, would have resulted in commission of the crime. Martin v. People, 179 Colo. 237, 499 P.2d 606 (1972). The overt act need not be the last proximate act necessary to complete the offense. People v. Young, 694 P.2d 841 A sub......
-
People v. Applegate, No. 25270
...deviated from the necessity to show 'some real and not imaginary' independent evidence of the Corpus delicti. See Martin v. People, Colo., 499 P.2d 606; Owen v. People, 155 Colo. 19, 392 P.2d 163; Meredith v. People, 152 Colo. 69, 380 P.2d 227; Williams v. People, 114 Colo. 207, 158 P.2d Ex......