People v. Randazzo, Cr. 5264
Decision Date | 29 March 1955 |
Docket Number | Cr. 5264 |
Citation | 281 P.2d 289,132 Cal.App.2d 20 |
Court | California Court of Appeals Court of Appeals |
Parties | The PEOPLE of the State of California, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. Donald Richard RANDAZZO, Defendant and Appellant. |
Morris Lavine, Los Angeles, for appellant.
Edmund G. Brown, Atty. Gen., Elizabeth Miller, Deputy Atty. Gen., for respondent.
Defendant was charged by information with robbery in Count I and in Count II with kidnapping for the purpose of robbery. The jury found defendant guilty on both counts and on the second count recommended life imprisonment without possibility of parole. A motion for a new trial was denied and the appeal is from the judgment and order denying motion for a new trial.
It is contended on appeal that,
'I
'II
'The verdicts are contrary to the law and the evidence, particularly as to Count Two.
'III
'The defendant was denied due process of law guaranteed by the fourteenth amendment to the Constitution of the United States in the receipt in admission of the alleged confessions including: (a) the written confession; (b) the tape recording; (c) the motion picture reenactment.
'IV
'The court erred in its rulings throughout the trial of the case.
'(A)
'The court erred in refusing to compel the recall of Ed Hallmark, the alleged victim in the case, and in refusing to issue and order compulsory processes for that purpose.
'(B)
'The court erred in refusing to permit the defense to read Hallmark's testimony at the preliminary hearing in view of the fact that he was not permitted to be recalled.
'V
'The court erred in instructions given and refused.
'(A)
'The evidence did not support an instruction, or instructions, on the law of kidnapping.
'(B)
'The court erred in giving an instruction that kidnapping for the purpose of robbery may be found after the actual perpetration of a robbery.
'VI
'VII
'The court erred in pronouncing judgment on both offenses.'
The record reveals, as recited in respondent's brief that,
Defendant was arrested on the night of September 22nd. A complete confession followed the arrest which was recorded. Defendant was taken to the hospital where the victim stated, 'Yes, that is the old man I slugged'. Other evidence relating to defendant's guilt need not be detailed.
With regard to the first contention the record reveals that the minutes of the clerk show that,
'* * * Counsel for defendant is not present during the return of the verdicts, said counsel having stated to the Clerk by telephone that is was agreeable with counsel that the verdicts be returned in his absence due to his being in the City of Los Angeles and not feeling too well at the time of the...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
People v. Laursen
...(See also People v. Monk, 56 Cal.2d 288, 295 [14 Cal.Rptr. 633, 363 P.2d 865]; People v. Kristy, 4 Cal.2d 504, 507-508 ; People v. Randazzo, 132 Cal.App.2d 20, 23-24 In obedience to the above holding on the first appeal (People v. Laursen, supra, 264 Cal.App.2d at p. 945, 71 Cal.Rptr. 71), ......
-
People v. Laursen
...v. Monk, 56 Cal.2d 288, 295, 14 Cal.Rptr. 633, 363 P.2d 865; People v. Kristy, 4 Cal.2d 504 507--508, 50 P.2d 798; People v. Randazzo, 132 Cal.App.2d 20, 23--24, 281 P.2d 289.) Defendant also questions the admissibility of the fingerprints upon the ground custody of them was not accounted f......
-
People v. Martin
...to another place where he might less easily sound an alarm. People v. Kristy, 4 Cal.2d 504, 507--508, 50 P.2d 798; People v. Randazzo, 132 Cal.App.2d 20, 23--24, 281 P.2d 289.)' (People v. Monk, 56 Cal.2d 288, 295, 14 Cal.Rptr. 633, 636, 363 P.2d 865, The evidence adduced at trial was more ......
-
People v. Randazzo
...conviction was affirmed by the District Court of Appeal, Second Appellate District, Division One, on March 29, 1955. People v. Randazzo, 132 Cal.App.2d 20, 281 P.2d 289. A petition for rehearing in the District Court of Appeal was denied, a subsequent petition for hearing in this court was ......