People v. Dodd
| Court | California Court of Appeals |
| Writing for the Court | SHINN |
| Citation | People v. Dodd, 113 Cal.App.2d 682, 248 P.2d 965 (Cal. App. 1952) |
| Decision Date | 16 October 1952 |
| Docket Number | Cr. 4720 |
| Parties | PEOPLE v. DODD. |
Edwin D. Jones, Jr., Los Angeles, for appellant.
Edmund G. Brown, Atty. Gen., for respondent.
In a nonjury trial appellant Dodd was convicted of second degree burglary. He was charged with and admitted a prior conviction of a felony for which he served a term in prison. He appeals from the judgment and from an order denying his motion for a new trial.
Upon the request of appellant for appointment of counsel this court appointed Edwin D. Jones, Jr., a member of the voluntary committee of the Los Angeles Bar Association on Criminal Appeals, with a request that he make a full report to the court after a study of the record and file a brief on behalf of the appellant if he should entertain a doubt that appellant was given a fair trial or whether any arguable ground exists for reversal of the judgment. Such report has been received, with counsel's statement that in his opinion no such ground of appeal exists. The report is considered as a substitute for a brief and does not call for a reply. From our examination of the record we are in full agreement with the conclusion stated in the report of counsel.
We have examined the record and find that during the trial the court made no rulings upon the admission or exclusion of evidence which were adverse to the defendant. There remains for consideration only the question whether there was substantial evidence that the crime charged was committed by the defendant. One Gonderman was jointly accused of the burglary and his case has been handled in the juvenile court. He was a witness for the People and implicated Dodd in the burglary. The question of the sufficiency of the evidence relates to that which tended to corroborate the testimony of the accomplice.
Gonderman testified that he had known defendant Dodd for 12 years; In May, 1951, he and defendant, looking for work on tunnel construction, drove in defendant's car from Los Angeles to Santa Barbara and thence to San Marcos Pass in the same area; they slept for two nights by the side of the road in the San Marcos Pass; they stopped at the Cold Springs Tavern and were directed to Paradise Camp where cabins were available; they discussed going to Paradise Camp to get blankets and whatever else could be found from an empty cabin in order to improve their roadside sleeping conditions; they found a relatively isolated cabin and defendant taped a window and broke it with his fist; defendant stood on a small stand below the window and after picking out the remaining pieces of glass, broke the inside screen and took it out; Gonderman then boosted the defendant through the opening and followed him; it was about 10 o'clock p. m. and there were no lights in the cabin; defendant and Gonderman used small wooden matches to see their way around; in the bedroom which they entered they picked up a stack of blankets, went to the kitchen and got silverware, a hot plate, pots and pans, and, from the living room, two large cushions. Defendant climbed back out the window and Gonderman handed the various articles to him; when the deputy sheriff arrested defendant on the morning of May 17th Gonderman was seated in defendant's car; at the time there were no keys in the car.
William Parker, a retired building contractor residing in Santa Barbara, testified that he owned a cabin in Los Prietos (in Santa Barbara County) which he and his family used for occasional weekend visits; the cabin was kept furnished and stocked with all the necessary utensils, bedding and appliances for purposes of use on short notice; at no time had Mr. Parker given defendant Dodd or his companion Gonderman permission to enter the cabin; on Saturday, May 26, 1952, Parker drove to the cabin, went in the front door and saw small burnt matches all over the floor and the bedroom window broken; missing were blankets, large couch pads, silverware, pots and pans and an electric hot plate; the window had been taped with masking tape, then broken and the broken part placed on the ground; the window was about 6 feet above the surface of the ground; later, in the Santa Barbara County Court House, Parker identified a group of articles which had been taken from defendant's car by the officer; in support of his identification he testified that he had previously repaired one element of the hot plate and thus was able to identify it. He also testified that he had personally made the couch pads.
Clayton Cornish testified that he was a deputy sheriff; that in company with Deputy Sheriff Harry Looney he arrested defendant on the morning of May 17th at the mouth of the Tecolote Tunnel. Cornish took defendant to the latter's 1937 car which was parked close by and found Gonderman seated in the car; there were no keys inside the car. In the back seat of the car there were blankets, quilts, sheets, cushions and also a roll of white masking tape similar to that which had been used to break open the cabin window. Cornish took Gonderman in his car and Looney went with the defendant; they drove to ...
Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI
Get Started for FreeStart Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial
-
People v. Robinson
...Wayne (1953) 41 Cal.2d 814, 822(2b), 264 P.2d 547; People v. Frankfort (1952) 114 Cal.App.2d 680, 692(17), 251 P.2d 401; People v. Dodd (1952) 113 Cal.App.2d 682, 686(1, 2), 248 P.2d 965; People v. Ross (1941) 46 Cal.App.2d 385, 395(3), 116 P.2d 81, and cases there The latter proposition, o......
-
People v. Davis
...as to connect De Louize with participation in the robbery. (People v. Henderson, 34 Cal.2d 340, 345, 209 P.2d 785; People v. Dodd, 113 Cal.App.2d 682, 686, 248 P.2d 965.) There is, however, more than that. There is the statement by Davis asking Freeman to get De Louize and join him back of ......
-
People v. Cervantes
...and states that he has failed to find any meritorious ground upon which to base an argument on this appeal. Citing People v. Dodd, 113 Cal.App.2d 682, 248 P.2d 965; People v. Sutton, 115 Cal.App.2d 751, 252 P.2d 633; and People v Hickok, 120 Cal.App.2d 832, 262 P.2d 30. Upon reviewing the e......
-
People v. Chavez
...and stating that there is no merit in the appeal and that no valid grounds for reversing the conviction exist. (See People v. Dodd, 113 Cal.App.2d 682, 248 P.2d 965; People v. Sutton, 115 Cal.App.2d 751, 252 P.2d 633 and People v. Hickok, 120 Cal.App.2d 832, 262 P.2d We have examined the re......