People v. McClure

• Decision Date: 14 June 1955
• Docket Number: Cr. 5272
• Citation: 133 Cal.App.2d 631,284 P.2d 887
• Court: California Court of Appeals Court of Appeals
• Parties: The PEOPLE of the State of California, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. Willie L. McCLURE, Defendant and Appellant.

Page 887

284 P.2d 887

133 Cal.App.2d 631

The PEOPLE of the State of California, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. Willie L. McCLURE, Defendant and Appellant.

Cr. 5272.

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

June 14, 1955.

Hearing Denied July 13, 1955.

William Bronsten, Los Angeles, for appellant.

Edmund G. Brown, Atty. Gen., James D. Loebl, Deputy Atty. Gen., for respondent.

SHINN, Presiding Justice.

Appellant Willie McClure was convicted by a jury of burglary in the second degree. He was charged with the burglary of a railroad boxcar and with one prior conviction of theft from an interstate shipment, a felony, for which he had suffered imprisonment. This appeal is from the judgment.

The evidence was that a switchman for the Union Pacific Railroad coming to work at 3:00 p. m., on March 22, 1954, observed that the seals on three boxcars on a siding near the Soto Street Sears Roebuck building were in place, and the doors of the cars were closed. At 7:30 p. m. when he returned to move the cars he noticed that the seals on each of the three cars had been broken, and the doors of two of the boxcars had been forced open. An agent of Union Pacific testified that no one had been given permission to enter the boxcars. From one consigned to Sears, Roebuck Company, shoes, and shirts bearing the Sears' trademark 'Pilgrim,' and sportswear were missing. Defendant was arrested at 12:45 a. m. on March 23, 1954 while seated in his automobile. The arresting officer found a large number of shoes, men's trousers and shirts bearing the 'Pilgrim' trademark in the back seat. Some of these were placed in evidence and were identified as those found in defendant's car.

Defendant gave conflicting explanations of where he had obtained the merchandise. The arresting officer testified that defendant told him at first that he knew nothing about the merchandise in the back seat; that later he said the goods belonged to his wife. Officer Edwards testified defendant told him that he bought the merchandise from an unidentified man at '23rd and Compton' and that the next day appellant told him that the 'other man' had entered the freight cars, and had thrown the cartons out to him, but that he, defendant, had not entered the freight cars himself; that they went to 23rd and Compton where he paid the other man $30 for the items. On the witness stand, defendant testified he had seen a man removing the cartons from the freight cars and 'stashing' them, and that he, defendant, had gathered the merchandise up to take to the police station, in the course of which he was arrested.

Appellant's main contention is that there was insufficient evidence to sustain the conviction; that the evidence merely showed he was in possession of stolen property. There was evidence, however, that not only was defendant in possession of the stolen property when arrested, but that by his own admission he had been present and had aided and abetted another unidentified person in the burglarizing of the boxcars and the removing of at least part of the contents. Possession of the stolen property, coupled with evidence that the accused aided another in removing the stolen goods from the freight car after the entry, and removed the goods from the scene of the crime, attempting to conceal them, was sufficient evidence to sustain the verdict. People v. Kellner, 67 Cal.App.2d 477, 154 P.2d 425. In order to support a conviction of burglary, it is unnecessary to show that defendant actually entered the premises burglarized, if the evidence establishes that the accused acted as an accessory who...