People v. Trujillo
| Decision Date | 29 July 1960 |
| Docket Number | Cr. 7239 |
| Citation | 6 Cal.Rptr. 535,183 Cal.App.2d 388 |
| Court | California Court of Appeals Court of Appeals |
| Parties | PEOPLE of the State of California, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. Robert Moses TRUJILLO, Defendant and Appellant. |
Robert Moses Trujillo, appellant, in pro. per.
No appearance for respondent.
Robert Moses Trujillo was charged by information with possessing heroin. It was also alleged that he had previously suffered two felony convictions for burglary. In a court trial Trujillo was found guilty of possession; no finding was made as to the priors. Trujillo appeals from the judgment.
Appellant was represented by counsel at the trial. He applied for appointment of counsel on the appeal. After reading the record we denied the application for the reason that the appeal has no semblance of merit and the appointment of an attorney would serve no useful purpose. Appellant was notified of the denial and his time to file a brief was extended; none has been filed.
There was evidence of the following facts. Officer Norris and two other officers drove to a rooming house on South Flower in Los Angeles and went upstairs. As Norris walked down the hall he looked through an open doorway into one of the rooms. Trujillo was standing in front of a dresser with his back to the officers. A man was standing at his left and a woman at his right. When they heard the officers appellant's companions stepped away from him and Trujillo reached forward with his right hand, dropping a spike and eye-dropper combination on the top of the dresser and slipping another object under a doily; at the same time a small white paper packet dropped to the floor. The officers entered and placed the occupants under arrest. They recovered the eye-dropper, some razor blades, a packet of white powder and a spoon containing more white powder from the dresser; they recovered the packet from the floor near appellant's foot. The powder in the package and the spoon was analyzed by a police chemist and found to consist of heroin. Officer Buckner, a qualified narcotics expert, identified the other items as paraphernalia used in injecting narcotics. Buckner also gave the substance of a conversation he had will Trujillo at the police station. Appellant's statements were free and voluntary. He told Buckner that he had purchased a gram of heroin at a market and was preparing to take an injection when the officers entered.
Trujillo testified that he went to...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
People v. Toulson
...show defendant's knowledgeable possession of contraband. (People v. Rightnour, 243 Cal.App.2d 663, 52 Cal.Rptr. 654; People v. Trujillo, 183 Cal.App.2d 388, 6 Cal.Rptr. 535.) Defendant's next contention, that his commitment was illegal, is without merit. The correlative issue raised by defe......