People v. Watkins, Cr. 2633

Citation214 P.2d 414,96 Cal.App.2d 74
Decision Date15 February 1950
Docket NumberCr. 2633
CourtCalifornia Court of Appeals
PartiesPEOPLE v. WATKINS.

J. Maxwell Peyser, San Francisco, for appellant.

Fred N. Howser, Attorney General, David K. Lener, Deputy Attorney General, Edmund G. Brown, District Attorney of City and County of San Francisco, Francis Mayer, Assistant District Attorney, San Francisco, for respondent.

PER CURIAM.

Defendant Charles E. Watkins was charged jointly with Troy Carson with a violation of section 11500 of the Health and Safety Code, Deering's Health & Safety Code, 1949 Supp., alleged to have been committed by the transporting of marihuana. Carson entered a plea of guilty and was sentenced to imprisonment in the county jail for one year. Watkins was tried without a jury, convicted and also sentenced to one year imprisonment in the county jail.

On this appeal defendant attacks the sufficiency of the evidence to support the judgment. Two other points--(a) that the burden of proof as to the defendant's guilt was upons the People and (b) that a motion for a dismissal made at the close of the prosecution's case should have been granted, based solely upon the sufficiency of the evidence,--may be considered under the first point presented.

Two plain clothes officers, Casciani and Duveneck, of the San Francisco Police Department were driving a car, not marked as a police car, eastward on Folsom Street in San Francisco about 12:30 a.m. on April 22, 1949, when a tan Lincoln sedan driven by defendant Watkins passed, traveling in the same direction. In passing, the passenger in the sedan, Troy Carson, was observed looking into the police automobile. Watkins made a right turn at the next intersection into Ninth Street and picked up speed. The police car followed and as the car driven by Watkins continued to increase its speed the police officers turned on the red light and siren. Carson was observed leaning toward Watkins, the motor 'raced considerably,' Watkins leaned toward Carson, the Carson 'went back against the door' and an object was thrown from the right window of the automobile. The automobile stopped at the next corner, Ninth and Harrison Streets. Watkins and Carson got out of the car in which they had been riding and on being questioned by the officers denied that anything had been thrown from the automobile. One of the officers walked back and picked up a paper bag which, as stipulated during the trial, contained marihuana. A stranger, Charles Johnson approached the group and talked to Casciani, out of earshot of Watkins and Carson. Officer Casciani's testimony in this connection was as follows:

'The Court: Both Troy Carson and this defendant denied throwing the bag out of the window of the car, is that correct, Officer? A. Yes, they denied that, Your Honor. * * * So while we were conversing with the two defendants another man approached by the name of Charles Johnson and I went up and talked to him, which was out of conversation earshot of the two defendants.

'Q. When you returned what happened? A. When I returned I said to Officer Deveneck, 'This fellow here says that there may be a second bag because the one he saw go out of the car went a little farther up the street.' So Bill [Duveneck] said, 'I'll go look for it.' * * * And when I said that to Officer Duveneck he started off to look for the bag and Troy Carson said, 'It's no use looking for the other bag,--there was only one,' and the defendant Watkins leaned over against Carson--they were both sitting in the rear seat of our automobile--and he clenched his fist and started swinging at him and said, 'What did you have to say that for?' So we had to hold them apart. And then I had a conversation with Carson.

'Q. In the presence of the defendant? A. Yes, and Carson said he bought the marihuana at Ellis and Fillmore and said he paid $12.50 for the bag and then he went across the street and bought a packet of brown cigarette papers, and then he met the defendant...

To continue reading

Request your trial
14 cases
  • People v. Von Latta
    • United States
    • California Court of Appeals
    • January 26, 1968
    ...to that specific offense any more than to an 'offer to transport' or an 'attempt to transport' a narcotic.' (People v. Watkins, 96 Cal.App.2d 74, 76, 214 P.2d 414, 416.)3 See People v. Wasley, 245 Cal.App.2d 383, 53 Cal.Rptr. 877, for suggestion that 'possession' is not an act, although acq......
  • People v. Dewson, Cr. 3329
    • United States
    • California Court of Appeals
    • April 15, 1957
    ...flight from the officers in the instant case is sufficient evidence to support the charge of transportation. People v. Watkins, 96 Cal.App.2d 74, 214 P.2d 414. As to count three for the assault by means of force likely to produce great bodily harm, the defendant maintains that as he was onl......
  • People v. Rogers
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court (California)
    • June 22, 1971
    ...... (People v. Valerio, 13 Cal.App.3d 912, 921, 92 Cal.Rptr. 82; People v. Vasquez, 135 Cal.App.2d 446, 448, 287 P.2d 385; People v. Watkins, 96 Cal.App.2d 74, 76, 214 P.2d 414; . Page 604 . [486 P.2d 132] see 2 Witkin, Cal.Crimes (1963) p. 644; but see People v. Solo, Supra, 8 ......
  • Rideout v. Superior Court of Santa Clara County
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court (California)
    • October 10, 1967
    ...v. Tostado, 217 Cal.App.2d 713, 719--720, 32 Cal.Rptr. 178; People v. Sanders, 163 Cal.App.2d 132, 135, 328 P.2d 825; People v. Watkins, 96 Cal.App.2d 74, 77, 214 P.2d 44; see 2 Witkin, Cal.Crimes, pp. 632--637, 642--644.) Such knowledge may be shown by circumstantial evidence. (People v. G......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

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