People v. Staker

• Decision Date: 30 October 1957
• Docket Number: Cr. 3305
• Citation: 316 P.2d 725,154 Cal.App.2d 773
• Court: California Court of Appeals Court of Appeals
• Parties: The PEOPLE of the State of California, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. Lorraine STAKER, Defendant and Appellant.

Page 725

316 P.2d 725

154 Cal.App.2d 773

The PEOPLE of the State of California, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. Lorraine STAKER, Defendant and Appellant.

Cr. 3305.

District Court of Appeal, First District, Division 1, California.

Oct. 30, 1957.

Rehearing Denied Nov. 29, 1957.

Hearing Denied Dec. 23, 1957.

Edmund G. Brown, Atty. Gen., Clarence A. Linn, Asst. Atty. Gen., Raymond M. Momboisse, Deputy Atty. Gen., Thomas C. Lynch, Dist. Atty., Francis W. Mayer, Deputy Dist. Atty., San Francisco, for respondent.

FRED B. WOOD, Justice.

Defendant-appellant Lorraine Staker and defendants Isnaldo Ferrari, Mildred Hoeffner and Marie Gifford ¹ were convicted of conspiracy (violation of § 182, Penal Code) in that they conspired and agreed with each other and with Patricia Murray and Billie Donovan to commit the crimes of grand theft (§§ 484 and 487, Penal Code), petty theft (§§ 484 and 488, Penal Code) and receiving stolen property (§ 496, Penal Code).

Murray and Donovan were not joined as defendants. They were prosecution witnesses. They did the stealing from various retail stores in San Francisco and, so they testified, sold various items of their ill-gotten gains to the several defendants, at prices considerably under the retail listings.

Staker took the witness stand and denied having taken any part in or having had any knowledge of the alleged conspiracy.

Murray testified, in respect to various articles which the police found in Miss Staker's apartment, that she had stolen those articles and sold them to Staker, specifically: a skirt stolen from J. Magnin about 2 1/2 years prior to the trial ² (Ex. 33); a brown alligator bag, stolen from Elizabeth Arden's in 1954 (Ex. 34); a blue alligator bag, stolen from some store within two years before the trial (Ex. 35); a brown purse, stolen from one of the better stores in 1954 (Ex. 36); two sweaters, stolen from I. Magnin in 1954 (Ex. 37); a tablecloth, stolen in 1952, 1953 or 1954 (Ex. 38); a tablecloth, stolen in 1953 or 1954 (Ex. 39); a set of six white handled steak knives (with holder or container), stolen from Sloane's or Gump's or some store like that, in 1954 (Ex. 40); a set of four brown handled steak knives which Murray stole from one of the better stores and sold to Staker in 1954, was 'identical' to the set introduced herein as Exhibit 41; a set of five silver or chromium colored steak knives, stolen from one of the better stores, in 1953 or 1954 (Ex. 42).

This testimony of an accomplice, of course, requires corroboration. Since one of the purposes of the corroboration requirement is that of ascertaining the truthfulness of the accomplice, more than a mere modicum or mere token of corroboration would seem logically to be indicated here. The witness Murray was serving time for grand theft. She stated that her business and occupation at the time of her arrest was shoplifting, and had been for five years. She had been stealing close to ten items a day--'about anything that a store carries,' of a value from $200 to $300 a day. At the time of her shoplifting she was also a narcotics addict and had been for fourteen years. A special officer working at two of the retail stores testified that Murray's reputation for truth, honesty and integrity was bad. It is observable, too, that Murray gave her testimony, concerning sales to Staker, knowing that the particular articles to which she referred had been found in Staker's apartment. In People v. Kempley, 205 Cal. 441, 271 P. 478, the Supreme Court adverted to the testimony of a similar accomplice-witness 'not for the purpose of arriving at a conclusion that her story might not be believed by the jury, but for the purpose of indicating that it is our duty to focus the spotlight on other evidence in the record which the prosecution claims measures up to the standard of corroborative evidence demanded by our law' (205 Cal. at page 455, 271 P. at page 484).

The State's claim that Murray's testimony was sufficiently corroborated rests upon (1) Staker's possession of stolen property, (2) certain statements made by Staker about the articles in her possession which Murray said had been stolen, and (3) asserted failure of Staker to deny certain accusations.

On the question whether these articles were stolen, Murray's testimony is not self-sufficient. She can not corroborate herself. The only independent testimony which the prosecution produced on this issue pertained to the brown alligator bag (Ex. 34) and one of the two sweaters which comprise Exhibit 37.

The manager of the Elizabeth Arden Salon in San Francisco testified that the store had received three brown alligator handbags like Exhibit 34; that two were sold to a Mr. Frank Inouye, an employee of the store; and that the third was in stock June 30, 1954, and missing on December 31, 1954, according to the inventory records. Exhibit 34 has 'Elizabeth Arden, New York' inscribed inside it. This is the marking on all handbags sold by the Elizabeth Arden stores throughout the country. By merely examining a bag the witness could not tell whether it came from the San Francisco or the New York store. A handbag like Exhibit 34 had disappeared from a table in the shop in 1954. The prosecution did not introduce any evidence accounting for the whereabouts of the two bags that had been sold.

One of the sweaters comprising Exhibit 37 had a green tag attached to it. The tag was in two parts. An assistant buyer in the sportswear department at I. Magnin's, the name of the store on the tag, testified that before 1955, when an article was sold, one part of the tag was ripped off and retained by the store. (After 1955, white tags were used.) She testified that such was the procedure but that articles could go out and have gone out of the store with both tags on them; through oversight of a sales clerk, for example. There were shortages in the sweater department in 1953 and 1954 but she 'couldn't tell you whether these were stolen or not, I mean, actually.'

This independent testimony, which pertains to only two of the ten items involved, is obviously very weak corroboration of the accomplice's testimony that the articles were stolen.

Before analyzing the appellant's out-of-court statements which the prosecution contends contain inconsistencies indicative of a guilty conscience and the accusations which, according to the prosecution, appellant failed to deny, we will briefly summarize appellant's evidence concerning her acquisition of Exhibits 33 to 42.

Appellant testified: The tan colored skirt (Ex. 33) was a gift to appellant from her sister Virginia Ellard of Bakersfield. The brown alligator bag (Ex. 34) was a gift to the witness from Marie Gifford.

The blue alligator bag (Ex. 35) was a gift to appellant from Dr. Rodney A. Yoell after his return from a trip he made into Mexico in 1952. This testimony is confirmed by the doctor who testified he first saw it in a shop window in Mexico City, went in, priced it, bought it, brought it back and gave it to Lorraine Staker as a present. Captain C. C. McCauley also confirmed: About 1952 Dr. Yoell gave Miss Staker a bag that is identical to this one; the captain happened to be there for dinner the night the doctor gave it to her; the doctor had shown this bag to the captain prior to making the presentation upon the doctor's return from Mexico; the captain had seen the blue bag many times during the last year.

The brown bag or purse (Ex. 36) appellant said she bought at the White House. The pertinent store records were produced (including a microfilm of a sales check made out to 'Lorraine Staker,' dated 4/11/55) which as interpreted by the store's bookkeeper and sales clerk indicated that on April 11, 1955, Miss Staker went into the handbag department, bought a bag No. 873, at a cost of $12.47 including taxes, and took it home, charging it to her account. Asked if she could recognize or identify Exhibit 36 the sales clerk said, 'Well, it is a type that I sold, but I couldn't recognize it for sure.'

The two sweaters (Ex. 37), appellant testified she bought in the Christmas rush of 1953, not for herself but as a gift for her niece, the witness' sister (mother of the prospective donee) going in with her to share the cost of the purchase. Appellant's part of the purchase was $35 of the $70 total. Then the sister concluded the sweaters were too 'adult' for the girl. So, appellant has been keeping them to give to the niece when the latter graduates from high school.

One of the tablecloths (Ex. 38), appellant testified, was given her by Dr. Yoell. This was confirmed by his testimony that it was given to him by the purser of one of the vessels of the steamship company for which the doctor was chief surgeon. The doctor, in turn, gave it to appellant. A customs official testified that this tablecloth is of ecru linen which could have originated anywhere but that the embroidery is hand worked, done somewhere in China, most likely around Swatow, by peasant workers in their homes.

The other tablecloth (Ex. 39), appellant said was given to her by Mrs. Zorzi. This was confirmed by Mrs. Mary Zorzi who testified that she gave it to Miss Staker around 1947 or 1948. She has been in Europe many times. Asked if she could relate this gift to one of those trips, Mrs. Zorzi said, 'Yes, I told Miss Staker I would bring her a tablecloth, and I had the tablecloth. My mother left it to me, and I gave it to Miss Staker.' She also gave her napkins that matched the tablecloth.

The set of six white handled steak knifes (Ex. 40), appellant testified she bought at Hale's Mission Store in San Francisco. She produced the check (Ex. O) which she used in paying for the knives. Edith Phillips, a fellow faculty member of the McKinley School where Miss Staker had been teaching for some years, testified that she was with the latter when she made this purchase at the Mission Store on November 22, 1954; these steak knives are exactly like the knives Miss Staker got that...