People v. Welch
| Decision Date | 18 July 1963 |
| Docket Number | Cr. 3436 |
| Citation | 31 Cal.Rptr. 926,218 Cal.App.2d 422 |
| Court | California Court of Appeals Court of Appeals |
| Parties | The PEOPLE of the State of California, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. Emanuel WELCH, Defendant and Appellant. |
Jack Lee Burford, Sacramento, for appellant.
Stanley Mosk, Atty. Gen., by Doris H. Maier, Asst. Atty. Gen., Sacramento, for respondent.
On a charge of robbery, the court found defendant guilty of second degree robbery. Defendant appealed.
Upon defendant's request an attorney was appointed to represent him on the appeal. This attorney has advised the court that after reviewing the record, he is of the opinion there are no valid grounds for an appeal. After an independent review of the record, we reach the same conclusion.
On September 24, 1962, at approximately 10 A.M., prosecution witnesses, Dodgson, Stewart and Lowery, were having coffee at Cooper's Doughnut Shop at 2d and 'K' Streets in Sacramento, when defendant, who had been in and out of the shop that morning, walked into the shop again, approached Dodgson, grabbed him by the neck, took his wrist watch and ran from the place. Dodgson described him to a police officer as 'a very large colored man,' and accompanied the officer on a tour of the vicinity. Defendant was apprehended on the street shortly thereafter. After he had been identified by Dodgson as the person who took his watch, the police searched defendant and found the watch, with the wristband broken, in his pocket.
Defendant was not only identified by Dodgson, but also by Lowery and Stewart.
Defendant, testifying on his own behalf, denied he had taken the watch from Dodgson, and testified that he had bought the watch for one dollar from a white man who had approached him on the street earlier that morning, and that the wristband broke when he tried to put it on. Earlier, when defendant had told this story (separately), to both the police officer and the district attorney, he had stated it was Dodgson who had sold him the watch. Testifying, he said it was not Dodgson but another.
Robbery is the felonious taking of personal property in the possession of another, from his person or immediate presence, and against his will, accomplished by means of force or fear. (Penal Code § 211.) It is sufficient if there is evidence of either force or fear. Here the taking of the watch 'snatched' from Dodgson is sufficient evidence of force. (See e. g., People v. Jefferson, 31 Cal.App.2d...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
People v. Collins
...evidence of fear (but not force) ( People v. James (1963) 218 Cal.App.2d 166, 169-170, 32 Cal.Rptr. 283 ; People v. Welch (1963) 218 Cal.App.2d 422, 423, 31 Cal.Rptr. 926 )—we have no occasion to reach these alternative arguments.* * *Because of the prejudicial prosecutorial error, we must ......
-
People v. Thomas
...on another ground in People v. Rollo (1977) 20 Cal.3d 109, 120, fn. 4, 141 Cal.Rptr. 177, 569 P.2d 771, and People v. Welch (1963) 218 Cal.App.2d 422, 423, 31 Cal.Rptr. 926.) People v. Roberts is especially similar to the present case. The court said: "Certainly, the evidence that the purse......
-
People v. Burns
...782 , overruled on another ground in People v. Rollo (1977) 20 Cal.3d 109, 120, fn. 4 [141 Cal.Rptr. 177, 569 P.2d 771]; People v. Welch (1963) 218 Cal.App.2d 422, 423 .) In People v. Roberts, the court said: "Certainly, the evidence that the purse was grabbed with such force that the handl......
-
People v. Thomas
...on another ground in People v. Rollo (1977) 20 Cal.3d 109, 120, fn. 4, 141 Cal.Rptr. 177, 569 P.2d 771, and People v. Welch (1963) 218 Cal.App.2d 422, 423, 31 Cal.Rptr. 926.) In People v. Roberts, the court said: "Certainly, the evidence that the purse was grabbed with such force that the h......