People v. Graham

Decision Date01 June 1967
Docket NumberCr. 334
CitationPeople v. Graham, 59 Cal.Rptr. 577, 251 Cal.App.2d 513 (Cal. App. 1967)
PartiesThe PEOPLE of the State of California, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. Calvin George GRAHAM, Jr., and James Edward Casey, Defendants and Appellants.
CourtCalifornia Court of Appeals

Thomas C. Lynch, Atty. Gen., Doris H. Maier, Asst. Atty. Gen., and Raymond M. Momboisse, Deputy Atty. Gen., Sacramento, for defendant.

CONLEY, Presiding Justice.

Three persons, Calvin George Graham, Jr., Charles Pike, and James Edward Casey, were charged with grand theft by reason of the 'till-tapping' on December 7, 1965, of the Z Market in Truckee, whereby $460 was stolen, in the form of 23 twenty-dollar bills. Charles Pike, who inserted his hand in the cash register, removed the bills and ran away, changed his original plea to admit guilt. This left the appellants, Calvin George Graham and James Edward Casey, for trial by the jury; each of them was found guilty as charged.

Appellant Casey, specifically, and appellant Graham, by inference, claimed that they were found guilty solely by reason of association with Pike; on the contrary, the People argue that the appellants were guilty, not by association, but by participation, and that the judgment against them must be affirmed.

The office manager of the Z Market in Truckee, Mr. Oliver Crose, testified that on December 7, 1965, he took care of the store for approximately an hour and a half during the head checker's lunch hour, and that, when the three men came into the market, he was near the meat shop but came to the checkout stand. Two of the men approached the east stand, where Casey requested a package of Pall Mall cigarettes. Mr. Crose removed a pack of Pall Malls, which was above the register, laid it on the counter next to Mr. Casey and rang the price up on the till; the drawer opened and Mr. Casey gave Mr. Crose a dollar bill; Crose started to make change and immediately Graham, who was behind Mr. Crose, requested Life Savers; Crose then closed the cash register and turned around to discuss the request with Graham, who finally decided he did not want any; but he first asked Crose what brands and what flavors he had; then, Crose took the dollar, opened the cash register and started for the second time to make change; then Casey asked how much he had said the cigarettes were, and Crose told him 28 cents; Casey said to give back the one dollar bill, because he had the correct change; this was done, and Crose put the change in the register and closed the till; the three men left the store. Mr. Pike had entered the market with the two defendants, and while Mr. Crose did not see him during the negotiations, he saw him leave with the other two men.

Ten minutes later the three men returned to the market and two of them went toward the meat shop. The third walked to the other end of the store; as there was no other person in the sales area, Mr. Crose went to the meat counter to help the two men. One of them requested bulk salami, which the store did not have; they were told that the market had packaged salami and were shown where it was kept; they asked if a roll of braunschweiger could be cut up for them, and the store manager answered that they did not cut up braunschweiger; the two men then took a small package of lunch meat and went toward the other end of the market, one of them saying, '* * * we'll get some crackers to go with it.' Mr. Crose walked to the check stand, and Casey came up with the package of lunch meat and laid it on the counter; he said that would be all he wanted; Mr. Crose rang the amount of the purchase on the register, which opened the cash drawer; Casey then started to reach down behind the counter where some candy was hanging, and asked if Mr. Crose would help him get some candy; Crose closed the cash register and started to go around the check stand to help him select what was wanted, and then Casey said--no, that he didn't want any candy, and he handed a dollar bill to pay for the meat; Mr. Crose opened the cash register again and then Casey 'immediately wanted some more candy'; Mr. Crose took the change out of the cash register, closed the drawer, laid the change down, put the meat on the counter, and then followed him around and started to help him pick out the candy. At this time, the store butcher, who had been in the back room, came into the market with a delivery man; one of the three customers had gone down an aisle near a drug rack; he 'hollered,' asking if the store had a certain kind of shaving lotion; so, Mr. Crose and the other two customers went to that aisle to find the shaving lotion; when the lotion could not be found, the three customers left the store. Mr. Crose did not see them again until later that day.

Howard Glenn Lewis, Jr., the head checker at the Z Market, testified that during the late afternoon of December 7, 1965, he ran out of twenty-dollar bills and got additional bills from the combination safe by the front door. Lewis unlocked it and took out 25 twenty-dollar bills, or a total of $500, and put the bills in the cash drawer. After that, he had one customer who paid for her groceries by check, and then the next customers were Graham and Casey; they entered the store together; Graham asked for a pack of Pall Mall cigarettes, and Mr. Lewis, who was standing next to him, got the cigarettes and put them on the counter. Graham handed Lewis a dollar bill for the cigarettes and Mr. Lewis rang up 28 cents, which opened the drawer. Lewis started to put the dollar in, but Graham said, 'Wait a minute,' and requested again to know the cost of the cigarettes. When Lewis said, '28 cents' Graham said, '* * * give me the dollar back,' because he had the correct change. This was done, and as Mr. Graham handed the 28 cents in coin to Mr. Lewis and the latter started to close the drawer, Graham said, '* * * wait a minute, I need some Life Savers'; they were on the other side of the cash register, and Lewis had to turn his body completely around to look at the Life Savers; the drawer to the cash register was left open. Graham was saying something which Lewis could not understand Mr. Lewis turned around; Pike, on the other side of the register, had stretched around the machine, and had his hand amongst the twenty-dollar bills. Mr. Lewis saw Pike's hand in the drawer, and that he pulled out his fist with a big wad of twenty-dollar bills in his grasp; Mr. Lewis closed the drawer, yelled for his boss, buzzed the bookkeeper, and ran out the door after Pike. The thief left very quickly. Casey and Graham in the same aisle, stood there as Pike and Mr. Lewis ran out; then, they also left; Pike, as he was running out of the store, had his coat on; his hand was in his pocket; he ran out the door to the parking area where his car was; he hurriedly got in it, backed out the car, and temporarily escaped. By that time it had grown dark; Lewis thought the car was a 54 Chevrolet; he remembered the license number and told the bookkeeper.

A woman customer was standing at the check stand to be waited on when David Rose, one of the owners of the store, responded to the buzzer. When he got to the front of the market, there were no employees in sight. The customer wanted a few items and she paid for them, and the owner opened the till; Mr. Rose noticed that only two twenty-dollar bills were left in the cash register, and remembered that not more than five minutes before, he had been out front and $500 in twenties had been taken out of the safe by an employee to be put in the cash register; Rose was surprised at the shortage of twenty-dollar bills, and thought that two or three large checks must have been cashed. As the owner was waiting on the customer, Lewis returned to the store. The owner then checked out the register with Mr. Crose. The cash register was short by $460 (i.e. 23 twenty-dollar bills) and some cents from what the total amount should have been.

Sergeant Sam Doyle of the Sierra County Sheriff's office testified that on the night of December 7, 1965, he received a dispatch from his office, relaying a message...

Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI

Get Started for Free

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

vLex

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

vLex

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

vLex

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

vLex

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

vLex

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

vLex
7 cases
  • People v. Brady
    • United States
    • California Court of Appeals
    • August 29, 1969
    ...fails to give the instruction Sua sponte (People v. Elliott, 241 Cal.App.2d 659, 667--668, 50 Cal.Rptr. 757; People v. Graham, 251 Cal.App.2d 513, 518--519, 59 Cal.Rptr. 577; People v. Horrigan, 253 Cal.App.2d 519, 522--523, 61 Cal.Rptr. 403); (2) the trial judge gives the instruction Sua s......
  • People v. Gardner
    • United States
    • California Supreme Court
    • August 20, 1969
    ...not decide the matter but held that any error in the failure to give the instruction was not prejudicial. (People v. Graham (1967) 251 Cal.App.2d 513, 518--519, 59 Cal.Rptr. 577; People v. Elliott (1966) 241 Cal.App.2d 659, 669, 50 Cal.Rptr. 757, cert. den. 385 U.S. 941, 87 S.Ct. 312, 17 L.......
  • People v. Northern
    • United States
    • California Court of Appeals
    • November 15, 1967
    ...253 Cal.App.2d ---, --- ****, 61 Cal.Rptr. 403) which say that it is error to give the instruction. On the other hand People v. Graham, 251 Cal.App.2d ---, --- *****, 59 Cal.Rptr. 577 and People v. Elliott, 241 Cal.App.2d 659, 50 Cal.Rptr. 757 appear to be contra. 2 We need not choose betwe......
  • People v. Horrigan
    • United States
    • California Court of Appeals
    • August 14, 1967
    ...CALJIC 51 (revised), which contained instructional verbiage somewhat different from that condemned in Griffin, supra. In People v. Graham, 251 Cal.App.2d 513 3, 59 Cal.Rptr. 577, defendant postulated on appeal he was denied a fair trial because the court did not give CALJIC (revised), Sua s......
  • Get Started for Free