People v. Chapman

Decision Date16 May 1957
Docket NumberCr. 3247
Citation311 P.2d 190,151 Cal.App.2d 59
PartiesThe PEOPLE of the State of California, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. Charles CHAPMAN, Defendant and Appellant.
CourtCalifornia Court of Appeals Court of Appeals

Joseph Jedeikin, San Francisco, for appellant.

Edmund G. Brown, Atty. Gen., Clarence A. Linn, Asst. Atty. Gen., Arlo E. Smith, Deputy Atty. Gen., for respondent.

KAUFMAN, Presiding Justice.

The defendant, Charles Chapman, was found guilty by a jury on two counts of violation of Penal Code, Section 470 for forgery of two checks on October 27, 1955, as charged in the information. He appeals from the judgment, contending that the evidence is insufficient to support the verdict; that certain evidence used against him obtained as the result of an unlawful search and seizure; that the bringing of witnesses to his apartment for purposes of identification violated his privilege against self-incrimination; that the prosecution falsified evidence; that the conduct of the district attorney and of the court were prejudicial and resulted in an unfair trial. The defendant rejected the services of the Public Defender and conducted his own defense at the trial, however, we have carefully scrutinized the record and find no merit in any of these contentions.

The facts as disclosed by the record are: At about 11:00 a. m. on October 27, 1955, at the Market and Montgomery Street Branch of the Bank of America in San Francisco, a man who identified himself as Robert Weldon cashed a check in the amount of $180.12, drawn by Manpower, Inc. on the First National Bank of Milwaukee, signed by A. R. Crowder and made payable to Robert Weldon. In the presence of the teller, Miss Davies, who appeared as a witness and identified the defendant as the Robert Weldon for whom she had cashed a check, the defendant endorsed the check 'Robert Weldon, 2400 Pacific' and produced as identification, a temporary driver's license issued in Hollywood to Robert Weldon. Miss Davies testified that the signature on the temporary license and the signature endorsed on the check were identical. Two other witnesses, Mrs. Ollerton and Mr. Reinberg, both tellers at the Anglo-California Bank at 1 Sansome Street, identified the defendant as Robert Weldon for whom they had cashed similar checks on October 25, 1955, on the strength of the temporary driver's license. All the checks were temporary payroll checks of Manpower, Inc. and were typewritten. At about 1:00 p. m. on October 27, 1955, the defendant appeared at Mrs. Ollerton's window and attempted to cash a similar Manpower, Inc. check, No. 3983 in the amount of $175.11. Mrs. Ollerton asked the defendant to have an officer of the bank to okay the check. The defendant then went in the direction of the bank officer and then to Mr. Reinberg's window. Mr. Reinberg cashed this check after the defendant had identified himself as Robert Weldon with the temporary driver's license, and had endorsed the check, 'Robert Weldon.' Mr. Reinberg testified that at this time the defendant was wearing a light green silk sport shirt with distinctive cuff links. A short while later Mr. Reinberg conversed with Mrs. Ollerton about the defendant's check. Mr. Reinberg then telephoned Manpower, Inc. and talked to Mr. Crowder, who established that the check in question along with 19 others (Check Nos. 3967 through 3989) were missing, as that set of check numbers had not yet been reached. Mr. Reinberg then consulted with Mr. Ovel, a security officer of the Anglo-California Bank. At about 2:00 p. m. on October 27, 1955, Mr. Ovel and Officer Torre of the fraud detail of the San Francisco Police Department, were in the defendant's apartment at 1450 Clay Street. The record does not indicate how the connection was made between the man identified as Robert Weldon of 2400 Pacific and the defendant, nor how Officer Torre and Mr. Ovel entered the apartment. There is no evidence of an unlawful entry. The defendant came home at about 2:30, and according to his testimony asked the officer to leave as he had no arrest or search warrant; according to the officer's testimony, he and Mr. Ovel left as he wanted more positive identification. The officer also testified that at this time the defendant was wearing a light green silk shirt. About half an hour or an hour later, Officer Torre returned to the defendant's apartment with another police officer and Mrs. Ollerton and Mr. Reinberg, who identified the defendant. The defendant was placed under arrest. At this time the defendant was wearing a red shirt. The green shirt he had been wearing earlier was found in the closet and taken by the police officers. Officer Torre testified that at his first visit to the apartment he noticed a typewriter (which was also taken by the officers after the arrest) and a piece of yellow stationery with the name 'A. R. Crowder' written on it twice. The piece of paper was not found in the apartment at the time of the arrest. The defendant denied the existence of this piece of paper. The defendant's roommate, however, testified to having seen such a piece of paper, as well as several checks. A. R. Crowder of Manpower, Inc. testified that the defendant had been temporarily employed as a clerk-typist from September 1955 until October 12th or 19th; that he had not signed the checks in question and that the defendant had no authority to sign checks for Manpower, Inc.; that there had never been a Robert Weldon employed by Manpower, Inc. in San Francisco. Mr. Schirtzinger, the defendant's roommate, testified that on the...

To continue reading

Request your trial
8 cases
  • People v. Conterno
    • United States
    • California Superior Court
    • April 30, 1959
    ...335 U.S. 887, 69 S.Ct. 236, 93 L.Ed. 426; People v. Robarge, 1953, 41 Cal.2d 628, 632-633, 262 P.2d 14; People v. Chapman, 1957, 151 Cal.App.2d 59, 63, 311 P.2d 190. Handwriting exemplars: People v. Harper, 1953, 115 Cal.App.2d 776, 779, 252 P.2d 950; People v. Smith, 1952, 113 Cal.App.2d 4......
  • Craig v. Superior Court
    • United States
    • California Court of Appeals Court of Appeals
    • January 16, 1976
    ...v. Lane, 240 Cal.App.2d 634, 640, 49 Cal.Rptr. 712; People v. Sowers, 204 Cal.App.2d 640, 645, 22 Cal.Rptr. 401; People v. Chapman, 151 Cal.App.2d 59, 63, 311 P.2d 90, cert. den., 355 U.S. 916, 78 S.Ct. 345, 2 L.Ed.2d These several authorities found no Fifth Amendment transgression to resul......
  • People v. McCarty
    • United States
    • California Court of Appeals Court of Appeals
    • October 17, 1958
    ...or an incidental search and seizure without a warrant. People v. Winston, 46 Cal.2d 151, 162, 163, 293 P.2d 40; People v. Chapman, 151 Cal.App.2d 59, 62, 311 P.2d 190; Lorenzen v. Superior Court, 150 Cal.App.2d 506, 512, 310 P.2d 180. The authority of the arresting officer in the instant ca......
  • People v. Robinson
    • United States
    • California Court of Appeals Court of Appeals
    • April 23, 1964
    ...with respect to the lack of objections below, citing People v. Garrison, 189 Cal.App.2d 549, 11 Cal.Rptr. 398 and People v. Chapman, 151 Cal.App.2d 59, 311 P.2d 190, in which cases there was a motion to strike or an informal objection to the receipt of the evidence. As is said in People v. ......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT