People v. Reed, Cr. 11845

Decision Date27 July 1967
Docket NumberCr. 11845
Citation252 Cal.App.2d 994,61 Cal.Rptr. 60
CourtCalifornia Court of Appeals Court of Appeals
PartiesPEOPLE of the State of California, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. John Tyrone REED, Defendant and Appellant.

Herbert & Levine and Morton Herbert, Hollywood, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for defendant and appellant.

Thomas C. Lynch, Atty. Gen., Elizabeth Miller and Mark W. Jordan, Deputy Attys. Gen., for plaintiff and respondent.

STEPHENS, Associate Justice.

Defendant John Tyrone Reed was charged, along with codefendant Cockerham, with violation of Penal Code section 211, robbery (count I); violation of Penal Code section 459, burglary (count II); and that at the time of commission of these offenses defendant was armed with a deadly weapon a gun, and committed an assault upon a person; violation of Penal Code sections 664 and 187, attempted murder (count III). A prior conviction of defendant of robbery, a felony, was also alleged. Defendant pleaded not guilty, but admitted the prior. After jury trial defendant and codefendant were each found guilty on each count, and each count was found to be of the first degree. The jury found defendant to have been armed at the time of the burglary. Count I was reduced to attempted robbery, a lesser included offense. Motion for new trial was denied, probation was denied, and sentence imposed to state prison for the term prescribed by law. Defendant appeals from the judgment of conviction.

The sole issue is the legality of the search of a residence and the seizure of the gun admitted into evidence.

On July 21, 1965, about 4:30 p.m., two men entered a drugstore in Pacoima which was owned by Mr. Shone. Donna Scott was an employee and at work in the store at the time. One man (later identified as Reed) confronted Scott. The other (later identified as Cockerham) went to the rear of the store. Scott was informed that it was a holdup. Shone saw the man in the rear of the store with his hand in the safe. Shone jumped Cockerham and a scuffle ensued. Reed fired a short at Shone and wounded him. Cockerham dropped his glasses during the scuffle. After the shot was fired, both men ran from the store. The glasses bore Cockerham's fingerprints, and a spent slug was found and identified as of 38 caliber. At 5:30 p.m. that same day, Cockerham and Reed were taken into custody in a Pacoima apartment.

On July 23, 1965, Sergeant Cohen, the arresting officer, returned to the Pacoima apartment, knocked on the door, and was invited in. Sergeant Cohen had no search warrant. The evidence is conflicting as to whether one Campbell answered the door, and after Cohen made known the purpose of his visit, said 'Come on in,' or whether one Miss Davis answered the door at Campbell's direction. Likewise, there is a conflict as to whether Campbell said he was a 'renter' or that Miss Davis was the 'renter.' In either event, Campbell was staying at the apartment, and called it 'home.' Campbell assisted Cohen in the search which resulted in finding the gun immediately beneath the couch and at the location defendant had been seated when arrested two days previously. Later the gun was determined to have been the one which...

To continue reading

Request your trial
2 cases
  • People v. Welch
    • United States
    • California Supreme Court
    • 1 Junio 1999
    ...a warrant or probable cause.... [p] The person in control of the premises may consent to a search thereof." (People v. Reed (1967) 252 Cal.App.2d 994, 995-996, 61 Cal.Rptr. 60.) Defendant cites Minnesota v. Olson (1990) 495 U.S. 91, 96-97, 110 S.Ct. 1684, 109 Page 234 L.Ed.2d 85, for the pr......
  • People v. Veiga
    • United States
    • California Court of Appeals Court of Appeals
    • 11 Octubre 1989
    ...defendants. 3 A valid consent to enter and search eliminates the need for either a warrant or probable cause. (People v. Reed (1967) 252 Cal.App.2d 994, 995, 61 Cal.Rptr. 60; People v. Wilcox (1969) 276 Cal.App.2d 414, 416, 81 Cal.Rptr. 60; Vandenberg v. Superior Court (1970) 8 Cal.App.3d 1......
2 books & journal articles
  • Chapter 5 - §3. Exceptions to warrant requirement
    • United States
    • Full Court Press California Guide to Criminal Evidence Chapter 5 Exclusion of Evidence on Constitutional Grounds
    • Invalid date
    ...136 Cal.App.3d 503, 506 (roommate's consent to search closet accessible from common hallway valid); People v. Reed (2d Dist.1967) 252 Cal.App.2d 994, 995-96 (roommate or cotenant's consent to search living room valid). A roommate or cotenant can also consent to searches of containers if the......
  • Table of Cases null
    • United States
    • Full Court Press California Guide to Criminal Evidence Table of Cases
    • Invalid date
    ...People v. Reed, 13 Cal. 4th 217, 52 Cal. Rptr. 2d 106, 914 P.2d 184 (1996)—Ch. 3-B, §5.2.2; §20.5.2; §21.4.4(4) People v. Reed, 252 Cal. App. 2d 994, 61 Cal. Rptr. 60 (2d Dist. 1967)—Ch. 5-A, §3.3.1(2)(b)[1][b] People v. Reeder, 82 Cal. App. 3d 543, 147 Cal. Rptr. 275 (2d Dist. 1978)—Ch. 3-......

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