People v. Holliday, Cr. 5009

CourtCalifornia Court of Appeals
Writing for the CourtFOX; MOORE, P. J., and McCOMB
Citation120 Cal.App.2d 562,261 P.2d 301
PartiesPEOPLE v. HOLLIDAY.
Docket NumberCr. 5009
Decision Date05 October 1953

Page 301

261 P.2d 301
120 Cal.App.2d 562
PEOPLE

v.
HOLLIDAY.
Cr. 5009.
District Court of Appeal, Second District, Division 2, California.
Oct. 5, 1953.

[120 Cal.App.2d 563] Bernay, Leader & Bass and William W. Larsen, Los Angeles, for appellant.

Edmund G. Brown, Atty. Gen., Alan R. Woodard, Deputy Atty. Gen., for respondent.

FOX, Justice.

Appellant was charged in count one with transporting marijuana and in count two with possession thereof, each in violation of section 11500, Health and Safety Code. He was convicted on both counts. He appeals from the judgment and the order denying his motion for a new trial.

Page 302

Appellant does not attack the judgment on count two--possession. He does, however, challenge his conviction on the charge of transportation on the grounds (1) of the insufficiency of the evidence, and (2) that only a single act is here involved yet two separate criminal offenses have been carved out of it. His position is not well founded.

As a result of a previous contact, appellant, who was in a coupe driven by his codefendant, Kelly, approached Officer Ruskin's car and inquired whether he had the money. Upon receiving an affirmative reply, appellant got out of his car and went back of a near-by building. He returned with a brown paper bag and said, 'Here it is.' Ruskin examined the contents which was identified by appellant as marijuana, but protested the quality and refused to make the purchase. Appellant returned with the bag to the Kelly car which later stopped in front of a small hotel. Appellant went into the hotel, Kelly remaining at the wheel. Kelly was then arrested, and a bag containing approximately one half pound of marijuana was found on the passenger side of the seat near the door.

Appellant was observed coming out of room 8 and locking the door. He denied living there but upon demand produced one of his personal keys that unlocked the door. The manager of the hotel testified that he rented the room to Kelly under the name Jordan, but he had seen appellant around the hotel about once a week since Kelly had lived there, and had seen him enter the latter's room.

Upon a search of the room, approximately eleven pounds of marijuana were found in various bags and in a trunk which also contained a scales.

[120 Cal.App.2d 564] The circumstances here revealed, viz., the large quantity of marijuana in 'Kelly's' room together with the scales, the possession of a key to this room by appellant, and his frequent...

To continue reading

Request your trial
14 practice notes
  • People v. Francis, Cr. 12971
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court (California)
    • May 6, 1969
    ...thus was not an incident thereto. (Cf. People v. Sheldon, 254 Cal.App.2d 174, 181--182, 61 Cal.Rptr. 778; see also People v. Holliday, 120 Cal.App.2d 562, 564, 261 P.2d 301.) People v. Davis, Supra, 263 A.C.A. 685, 688, 69 Cal.Rptr. 849, is disapproved to the extent that it indicates that p......
  • People v. Von Latta, Cr. 2682
    • United States
    • California Court of Appeals
    • January 26, 1968
    ...se they were not separate and distinct. (People v. Wasley, supra, 245 Cal.App.2d 383, 387, 53 Cal.Rptr. 877.) In People v. Holliday, 120 Cal.App.2d 562, 564--565, 261 P.2d 301, it was held possession of a narcotic occurring as an incident to the offense of transportation, and possession the......
  • People v. Rogers, Cr. 14756
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court (California)
    • June 22, 1971
    ...People v. Burke, 208 Cal.App.2d 149, 162, 24 Cal.Rptr. 912; People v. Miller, 162 Cal.App.2d 96, 98, 328 P.2d 506; People v. Holliday, 120 Cal.App.2d 562, 564, 261 P.2d 301; People v. Coleman, 100 Cal.App.2d 797, 801, 224 P.2d 837.) Possession may be either actual or constructive; the latte......
  • Rideout v. Superior Court of Santa Clara County, S.F. 22530
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court (California)
    • October 10, 1967
    ...be found guilty of unlawful transportation of narcotics. (People v. Miller, 162 Cal.App.2d 96, 98, 328 P.2d 506; People v. Holliday, 120 Cal.App.2d 562, 564, 261 P.2d 301; People v. Coleman, 100 Cal.App.2d 797, 801, 224 P.2d 837.) Knowledge by the defendant of both the presence of the drug ......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
14 cases
  • People v. Francis, Cr. 12971
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court (California)
    • May 6, 1969
    ...thus was not an incident thereto. (Cf. People v. Sheldon, 254 Cal.App.2d 174, 181--182, 61 Cal.Rptr. 778; see also People v. Holliday, 120 Cal.App.2d 562, 564, 261 P.2d 301.) People v. Davis, Supra, 263 A.C.A. 685, 688, 69 Cal.Rptr. 849, is disapproved to the extent that it indicates that p......
  • People v. Von Latta, Cr. 2682
    • United States
    • California Court of Appeals
    • January 26, 1968
    ...se they were not separate and distinct. (People v. Wasley, supra, 245 Cal.App.2d 383, 387, 53 Cal.Rptr. 877.) In People v. Holliday, 120 Cal.App.2d 562, 564--565, 261 P.2d 301, it was held possession of a narcotic occurring as an incident to the offense of transportation, and possession the......
  • People v. Rogers, Cr. 14756
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court (California)
    • June 22, 1971
    ...People v. Burke, 208 Cal.App.2d 149, 162, 24 Cal.Rptr. 912; People v. Miller, 162 Cal.App.2d 96, 98, 328 P.2d 506; People v. Holliday, 120 Cal.App.2d 562, 564, 261 P.2d 301; People v. Coleman, 100 Cal.App.2d 797, 801, 224 P.2d 837.) Possession may be either actual or constructive; the latte......
  • Rideout v. Superior Court of Santa Clara County, S.F. 22530
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court (California)
    • October 10, 1967
    ...be found guilty of unlawful transportation of narcotics. (People v. Miller, 162 Cal.App.2d 96, 98, 328 P.2d 506; People v. Holliday, 120 Cal.App.2d 562, 564, 261 P.2d 301; People v. Coleman, 100 Cal.App.2d 797, 801, 224 P.2d 837.) Knowledge by the defendant of both the presence of the drug ......
  • 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