People v. Groom, Cr. 7435

CourtUnited States State Supreme Court (California)
Writing for the CourtPEEK; GIBSON
Citation36 Cal.Rptr. 327,388 P.2d 359,60 Cal.2d 694
Parties, 388 P.2d 359 The PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. George Gary GROOM, Defendant and Appellant.
Docket NumberCr. 7435
Decision Date28 January 1964

Page 327

36 Cal.Rptr. 327
60 Cal.2d 694, 388 P.2d 359
The PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent,
v.
George Gary GROOM, Defendant and Appellant.
Cr. 7435.
Supreme Court of California, In Bank.
Jan. 28, 1964.

Page 328

[388 P.2d 360] [60 Cal.2d 695] Burton Marks, Beverly Hills, and Harry Weiss, Los Angeles, for defendant and appellant.

Stanley Mosk, Atty. Gen., William E. James, Asst. Atty. Gen., and Walter E. White, Deputy Atty. Gen., for plaintiff and respondent.

PEEK, Justice.

The sole contention made by defendant in his appeal from a judgment of conviction for possession of marijuana (Health & Saf.Code, § 11530) is that the evidence is insufficient to sustain the judgment. This contention we hold to be without merit.

Subject to the right of the prosecution to introduce additional evidence the cause was submitted to the trial court on the transcript of the preliminary hearing, which contained only the testimony of Officer Madison of the Los Angeles Police Department that at approximately 4:30 a. m. on June 6, 1961, as he and Officer Allen were driving east on Sunset Boulevard in an unmarked patrol car and wearing civilian clothing they observed the defendant walking in the opposite direction; that as the officers passed the defendant he looked over his shoulder toward the patrol car and continued to so [60 Cal.2d 696] watch the officers as they drove on; that the officers likewise continued to watch defendant as they passed; that they then made a U-turn and drove westward back toward defendant; that as they approached the defendant and stopped at the curb, he reversed his direction; that when 15 or 20 feet from the car he 'opened his right hand and made a downward throwing motion'; that as he did so Madison saw a small white object fall to the sidewalk and bounce behind a nearby newsstand.

After the vehicle was stopped Madison further testified that he stepped out and identified himself; that Officer Allen then approached and both officers began a conversation with defendant; that while so engaged Madison walked over to the newsstand where he observed a white paper-wrapped cigarette lying on the sidewalk; that the sidewalk was clean, and that there was no other paper or foreign objects on the sidewalk in the immediate area.

Officer Madison then related that when he asked the defendant where he got the

Page 329

[388 P.2d 361] marijuana cigarette the latter replied that it was not his; that there were thousands of people that walked by that...

To continue reading

Request your trial
95 practice notes
  • People v. Machel, Cr. 4539
    • United States
    • California Court of Appeals
    • April 29, 1965
    ...of their narcotic character. These were essential elements of the offense with which he was subsequently charged. (People v. Groom (1964) 60 Cal.2d 694, 696, 36 Cal.Rptr. 327, 388 P.2d 359; People v. Redrick (1961) 55 Cal.2d 282, 285, 10 Cal.Rptr. 823, 359 P.2d 255; People v. Winston, supra......
  • People v. Wong, Cr. 10354
    • United States
    • California Court of Appeals
    • December 7, 1973
    ...existence of each element of the offense charged. (People v. Reilly, 3 Cal.3d 421, 425, 90 Cal.Rptr. 417, 475 P.2d 649; People v. Groom, 60 Cal.2d 694, 696--697, 36 Cal.Rptr. 327, 388 P.2d 359; People v. Valerio, 13 Cal.App.3d 912, 919, 92 Cal.Rptr. 8,19] In applying the substantial evidenc......
  • People v. Webb, Cr. 10374
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court (California)
    • March 8, 1967
    ...dominion and control over the red balloon, knew of its presence, and knew the narcotic character of its contents. (People v. Groom (1964) 60 Cal.2d 694, 697, 36 Cal.Rptr. 327, 388 P.2d [66 Cal.2d 128] Finally, defendant complains of the fact that the trial court chose to give the jury its i......
  • People v. Nudd, Cr. 17295
    • United States
    • California Supreme Court
    • July 31, 1974
    ...to support the convictions. (See People v. White (1969) 71 Cal.2d 80, 82, 75 Cal.Rptr. 208, 450 P.2d 600; People v. Groom (1964) 60 Cal.2d 694, 696, 36 Cal.Rptr. 327, 388 P.2d 359; People v. Redrick (1961) 55 Cal.2d 282, 285, 10 Cal.Rptr. 823, 359 P.2d Judgment affirmed. WRIGHT, C.J., and M......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
95 cases
  • People v. Machel, Cr. 4539
    • United States
    • California Court of Appeals
    • April 29, 1965
    ...of their narcotic character. These were essential elements of the offense with which he was subsequently charged. (People v. Groom (1964) 60 Cal.2d 694, 696, 36 Cal.Rptr. 327, 388 P.2d 359; People v. Redrick (1961) 55 Cal.2d 282, 285, 10 Cal.Rptr. 823, 359 P.2d 255; People v. Winston, supra......
  • People v. Wong, Cr. 10354
    • United States
    • California Court of Appeals
    • December 7, 1973
    ...existence of each element of the offense charged. (People v. Reilly, 3 Cal.3d 421, 425, 90 Cal.Rptr. 417, 475 P.2d 649; People v. Groom, 60 Cal.2d 694, 696--697, 36 Cal.Rptr. 327, 388 P.2d 359; People v. Valerio, 13 Cal.App.3d 912, 919, 92 Cal.Rptr. 8,19] In applying the substantial evidenc......
  • People v. Webb, Cr. 10374
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court (California)
    • March 8, 1967
    ...dominion and control over the red balloon, knew of its presence, and knew the narcotic character of its contents. (People v. Groom (1964) 60 Cal.2d 694, 697, 36 Cal.Rptr. 327, 388 P.2d [66 Cal.2d 128] Finally, defendant complains of the fact that the trial court chose to give the jury its i......
  • People v. Nudd, Cr. 17295
    • United States
    • California Supreme Court
    • July 31, 1974
    ...to support the convictions. (See People v. White (1969) 71 Cal.2d 80, 82, 75 Cal.Rptr. 208, 450 P.2d 600; People v. Groom (1964) 60 Cal.2d 694, 696, 36 Cal.Rptr. 327, 388 P.2d 359; People v. Redrick (1961) 55 Cal.2d 282, 285, 10 Cal.Rptr. 823, 359 P.2d Judgment affirmed. WRIGHT, C.J., and M......
  • 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