People v. Helms

• Decision Date: 25 May 1966
• Docket Number: Cr. 10817
• Citation: 242 Cal.App.2d 476,51 Cal.Rptr. 484
• Court: California Court of Appeals Court of Appeals
• Parties: The PEOPLE of the State of California, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. Curtis Silas HELMS, Jr., and Carl Henry Lyons, Defendants and Appellants.

Page 484

51 Cal.Rptr. 484

242 Cal.App.2d 476

The PEOPLE of the State of California, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. Curtis Silas HELMS, Jr., and Carl Henry Lyons, Defendants and Appellants.

Cr. 10817.

District Court of Appeal, Second District Division 3, California.

May 25, 1966.

Donald Jacobs, Los Angeles, under appointment by the District Court of Appeal, for appellants.

Thomas C. Lynch, Atty. Gen., William E. James, Asst. Atty. Gen., Stanton Price, Deputy Atty. Gen., for respondent.

KAUS, Justice.

Defendants Helms and Lyons were each charged with burglary, robbery and assault with a deadly weapon. A jury convicted both of burglary and robbery but only Helms was found guilty of the assault charged. The victim of the crimes was one Nelson Heindl.

On appeal the sufficiency of the evidence is not questioned except with respect to the assault count, where it is claimed that a pillow cannot be a 'deadly weapon.' The case was tried November, 1964, after the Supreme Court had granted a rehearing following its first decision in People v. Dorado, 62 Cal.2d 338, 42 Cal.Rptr. 169, 398 P.2d 361. The trial judge expressly refused to follow the principles expressed in the first Dorado opinion, subsequently reaffirmed. ¹ The record therefore contains what the Attorney General must concede is error, but since no confession was obtained from either defendant and an automatic reversal is therefore not compelled, a rather detailed recital of the evidence becomes necessary. (People v. Hillery, 62 Cal.2d 692, 712--713, 44 Cal.Rptr. 30, 401 P.2d 382.)

The Evidence--People's Case.

Nelson Heindl. On the morning of January 24, 1964, Heindl left his home in Downey. His wife had previously called Shirley Smith, the Heindl maid, and left the front door open for her. Mrs. Heindl also left at about 8:00 a.m. At 10:15 Heindl returned home and saw a 1955 Ford stationwagon, later identified as belonging to Helms' father, on his driveway. He parked his car behind the Ford in order to block its exit. He went to the front door which was locked. He went to the back door, which he opened with his key and entered. He saw Helms standing in the kitchen. At that point Helms dashed into the front hallway and hid. Heindl called for Shirley Smith several times. When he received no response Helms called from where he was hiding: 'That's why we are here.' He then started to hit Heindl with his fist. Lyons entered from the rear of the house, wearing a hat. Both forced him into the family room. The beating continued for five or six minutes and he went down on the floor. Neither defendant said anything. At one point Heindl looked up and saw Lyons standing with a pipe wrench 'in a threatening position.' The wrench did not belong to Heindl. When the beating stopped Lyons dropped the wrench, ² went into the living room, returned with a pillow and handed it to Helms who then placed it over Heindl's face and attempted to smother him. This lasted for several minutes. Heindl was then tied up at his ankles, knees and hands and blindfolded. Helms wanted to know where Heindl kept his money. Heindl denied that there was money in the house and he was then gagged. The defendants left, leaving the wrench behind. The entire episode lasted about fifteen to twenty minutes. Later Heindl discovered that his wristwatch, wallet, credit cards and appointment book had been taken. The wallet contained $125.00. It was also discovered later that all of his suits, shirts, his wife's jewelry, a camera and a portable television had been taken. A small electronic unit which operates a garage door had been on the front seat of Heindl's car and it was missing too.

After the defendants left Heindl tried to release himself. One of them returned--he could not tell which--reached into his pocket for his car keys and applied a 'knee drop' to his head.

Heindl bled profusely and was taken to a hospital. There he identified the defendants from a group of photographs brought to him by a police officer.

On cross-examination Heindl testified that he did not notice a moustache on Helms or 'recognize' one on Lyons. The arresting officer later testified that both defendants wore moustaches at the time of their arrests which took place well within twenty-four hours after the crimes.

In other respects, apart from minor discrepancies between Heindl's testimony at the trial and that at his preliminary hearing--at which he had testified from his bed at the hospital--Heindl's version of the facts and particularly his identification remained unimpeached.

Nola Morris. This witness was a neighbor of the Heindls. At about 10:00 a.m. of January 24, 1964 she saw a 1955 Ford stationwagon on the Heindl driveway. One Negro got out of the car and another remained seated in it. The one who got out then entered the house through the front door, the other followed shortly thereafter. She then saw Heindl arrive. Thirty minutes later she observed two Negroes come out of the house. They were of similar build and appearance as Helms and Lyons. She was unable to distinguish any special features of the two individuals because of the distance. One of them was wearing a hat. They were carrying what looked like a blanket and some object which was covered and 'obviously heavy.' One of them got into Heindl's car and the other into the stationwagon.

Daniel H. O'Donovan. This witness, a police officer of the City of Downey talked to Lyons sometime after he was arrested on the day of the crime. ³ Lyons gave conflicting stories. He first said that he had spent the evening of January 23 with Shirley Smith. Then someone called White came to her home and there was a fight about who would spend the night with Miss Smith. Lyons was injured in the fight, but won and stayed for the night. He did not leave her home on the morning of the 24th. Lyons then embellished his story and said that although the incident with White had taken place, Helms too had been at Miss Smith's home both in the evening and until 8:00 a.m. the following morning, that both had questioned her about the wealth of Heindl, what type of clothing, suits and things he kept at his house and that at one point Helms had invited him to go on a burglary of the Heindl residence. Lyons also told Officer O'Donovan that Helms returned later in the morning and gave Lyons the keys to a 1963 Cadillac in which he arrived.

Helms was arrested by the officer in the early morning hours of January 25 at his father's residence in San Pedro. He and another officer had been waiting for him when he arrived in the Ford stationwagon. The car was impounded and taken by towtruck to a lot or garage where it was searched. ⁴ After a cursory search at the scene of the arrest, which turned up nothing, another search was made in the 'daylight morning hours of the 25th or 26th.' Under the front passenger seat it revealed the electronic unit which had been taken from Heindl's car.

On the way to the station Helms denied any participation in the crimes. In the meanwhile Miss Smith had also been arrested. She, Lyons and Helms were brought into each other's presence. Miss Smith turned to Helms and said that she was ashamed of him 'to think that he would have robbed and burglarized her employer.' Helms remained silent.

At one point after Helms was in custody, Officer O'Donovan told Helms that the police had been advised by Helms' father that he had borrowed his car--apparently the 1955 Ford--early 'that morning.' Helms agreed and said that the reason he borrowed the car was that someone by the name of Renfrow, whom he had met once or twice in a poolroom, had promised him $75.00 for the use of the car for one day. Helms recalled having loaned the car to Renfrow but could not remember when it was returned to him.

Neither defendant was told of his constitutional rights. On cross-examination the officer testified that his purpose in bringing Miss Smith and the defendants into a room together was 'to see if an accusatory statement would be made by any of the defendants and to record any conversation that the defendants might make in the presence of one another * * * it wasn't a purpose to provoke anything. It was merely to see if an accusatory statement would be made or any admissions made by any of the three defendants.' At that time he had already obtained Lyons' admission about the discussion which the defendants had with Miss Smith and Lyons' denial of having participated in the crime. Defense.

Curtis L. Helms, Sr. The father of Helms was working in a cleaning establishment in San Pedro on the day of the crimes. He saw his son there between 9:30 and 10:00 a.m. He stayed from ten to fifteen minutes and then borrowed his car. He saw him again at the time of the arrest after midnight. At that time the officers looked in the car, under all of the seats. He never saw the electronic door opener until he appeared in court.

Defendant Helms. On January 24 he had to do some moving and borrowed his father's car for the purpose. He left the cleaning establishment in San Pedro at about 10:00 a.m. He went by his mother's house, drove to a poolroom in Los Angeles and loaned the car to a friend who returned it at about 3:30 or 4:00 p.m.

He denied Miss Smith's accusatory statement as reported by Officer O'Donovan. His version of what she said was 'did you have anything to do with this? If you did, it would hurt me to think that you would do anything like that.' He also denied telling O'Donovan about the Renfrow loan of the car. He admitted knowing Lyons, admitted that he had been at the residence of Miss Smith the night of January 23, but denied any discussion about her employer. The first time he had seen the electronic unit was at the preliminary hearing. The friend to whom he later on loaned his father's car had taken him to San Pedro on the morning of the 24th in a 1963 Cadillac. He never did get around to using the stationwagon to help him move. He had been at the Heindl residence on one previous...