People v. Valardi, Cr. 2121
| Decision Date | 08 February 1966 |
| Docket Number | Cr. 2121 |
| Citation | 240 Cal.App.2d 98,49 Cal.Rptr. 339 |
| Court | California Court of Appeals Court of Appeals |
| Parties | The PEOPLE of the State of California, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. Dave VALARDI, Defendant and Appellant. |
Robert H. Green, Santa Ana, for defendant and appellant.
Thomas C. Lynch, Atty. Gen., William E. James, Asst. Atty. Gen., and S. Clark Moore, Deputy Atty. Gen., for plaintiff and respondent.
A truck was stolen. Disregarding an accomplice's testimony (People v. Luker, 63 A.C. 485, 490, 47 Cal.Rptr. 209, 407 P.2d 9), the sole evidence implicating defendant is a hearsay statement admitted under an exception to the hearsay rule involving a conspiracy charge against defendant: The accomplice's wife testified her husband told her that he, defendant and two others stole the truck. Is this sufficient evidence tending to connect defendant with the crime? (People v. Luker, supra, 63 A.C. 485, 490, 47 Cal.Rptr. 209, 407 P.2d 9.) No. An accomplice's testimony is no better coming from another's mouth than coming from his own. If it were, the accomplice could broadcast his testimony to the world before trial and then call anyone who heard it to corroborate it in court.
The evidence of defendant's presence at the ranch where the stolen truck was taken was merely a suspicious circumstance, offset in part at least, by his employment there. A mere grave suspicion cast upon the defendant does not suffice. (People v. Luker, supra, 63 A.C. 485, 490, 47 Cal.Rptr. 209, 407 P.2d 9.)
Judgment reversed.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
People v. Abilez
..."did nothing more than show `the commission of the offense or the circumstances thereof.'" Similarly, in both People v. Valardi (1966) 240 Cal. App.2d 98, 49 Cal.Rptr. 339 and People v. Lloyd (1967) 253 Cal.App.2d 236, 61 Cal. Rptr. 138, the only evidence tending to corroborate an accomplic......
-
Turner v. State
...585 (Ala.Cr.App.1981) ("accomplices out-of-court statements cannot be used to corroborate his own testimony"); People v. Valardi, 49 Cal.Rptr. 339, 240 Cal.App.2d 98 (1966) ("An accomplice's testimony is no better coming from another's mouth than coming from his own. If it were, the accompl......
-
People v. Godines
...shooting. Although, geographical closeness to the crime alone is insufficient to corroborate a coconspirator's testimony (People v. Valardi (1966) 240 Cal.App.2d 98, 99), this evidence shows more than Mabson's mere geographical closeness to the scene of the shooting. It shows he traveled fr......
-
People v. Ortiz
...Canizalez contends, and the People appear to concede, that geographical closeness alone is insufficient corroboration (People v. Valardi (1966) 240 Cal.App.2d 98, 99), the cell phone evidence shows more than Canizalez's mere geographical closeness to the scene of the shooting. The evidence ......