People v. Young, Cr. 2267
| Court | California Court of Appeals |
| Writing for the Court | VAN DYKE; ADAMS, P. J., and PEEK |
| Citation | 233 P.2d 155,105 Cal.App.2d 612 |
| Parties | PEOPLE v. YOUNG. |
| Decision Date | 24 July 1951 |
| Docket Number | Cr. 2267 |
Page 155
v.
YOUNG.
Page 156
Mark Joseph and Jared W. Hawkins, Jr., Modesto, for appellant.
Doris H. Maier, Deputy Atty. Gen., for respondent.
VAN DYKE, Justice.
Appellant was informed against by the District Attorney of Stanislaus County for the crime of robbery in the felonious and forcible taking from the presence of Johanna Reyes of a radio, and it was further charged that at the time of the commission of the offense he was armed with a deadly weapon, to-wit, a 22-caliber rifle. Upon trial he was found guilty as charged and the jury fixed the offense as robbery of the first degree. Application was made for [105 Cal.App.2d 613] probation and the same was denied, but in this connection it fairly appears from the record that the denial was based upon a holding by the trial court that under the provisions of Section 1203 of the Penal Code it lacked jurisdiction to grant probation. Appellant was sentenced for the term prescribed by law and from this judgment, from the order denying new trial and from the order denying probation he has appealed.
The facts are as follows: About 9 P.M. on July 14, 1950, appellant and a companion went to the home of Mrs. Reyes. When she asked what they wanted, appellant, who then had in his hand a 22-caliber rifle which contained a number of cartridges in the magazine, stated to her that it was a stick-up. The testimony of Mrs. Reyes was that appellant 'was holding it [the gun] with both hands on it, just about like you have it, only at the door he pointed it just a little bit towards me. Q. He pointed it towards you? A. Yes sir.' The men entered the house and appellant's companion did the talking. He demanded money and when told there was none, asked where the safe was. When told there was no safe, he walked with Mrs. Reyes to where her purse was placed, but obtained no money therefrom. The men then left but as they left defendant, who carried the gun at all times, took a table radio with him.
On the appeal from the judgment and from the order denying new trial appellant contends only that the evidence is without conflict that because of intoxication he could not have possessed the necessary intent for the commission of the crime charged. That is not the state of the record. His intoxication, if it existed, was voluntary and there is sufficient evidence in the record to sustain a finding by...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. Rodgers, No. 2
...a 22-caliber gun to be a deadly weapon are: People v. Sandoval, 222 Cal.App.2d 348, 35 Cal.Rptr. 227, 229 (1963); and People v. Young, 105 Cal.App.2d 612, 233 P.2d 155 (1951). It is not a violation of the constitutional guarantee of a jury trial to instruct the jury on matters of law. Singh......
-
People v. Hollis, Cr. 6686
...361; People v. Ralls, 21 Cal.App.2d 674, 678, 70 P.2d 265; People v. Erickson, 74 Cal.App.2d 339, 340, 168 P.2d 417; People v. Young, 105 Cal.App.2d 612, 613, 233 P.2d 155; Schaefer [176 Cal.App.2d 97] v. Superior Court, 113 Cal.App.2d 428, 438, 248 P.2d 450. And see 29 Cal.Jur.2d 359, Judg......
-
People v. Washington, Cr. 18584
...578, 591--592, 248 P.2d 12) but to include the employment of a firearm to threaten, as well as to shoot or to strike (People v. Young, 105 Cal.App.2d 612, 614, 233 P.2d 155). Thus, while anyone who uses a firearm must necessarily Page 885 be armed with it the converse need not be true. For ......
-
People v. Spencer, Cr. 20192
...within the meaning of section 12022.5 includes 'display with menace during the course of the robbery.' (See also, People v. Young, 105 Cal.App.2d 612, 233 P.2d Appellant contends that the allegation in the amended information 'that at the time of the commission o the (robbery) said defendan......
-
State v. Rodgers, No. 2
...a 22-caliber gun to be a deadly weapon are: People v. Sandoval, 222 Cal.App.2d 348, 35 Cal.Rptr. 227, 229 (1963); and People v. Young, 105 Cal.App.2d 612, 233 P.2d 155 (1951). It is not a violation of the constitutional guarantee of a jury trial to instruct the jury on matters of law. Singh......
-
People v. Hollis, Cr. 6686
...361; People v. Ralls, 21 Cal.App.2d 674, 678, 70 P.2d 265; People v. Erickson, 74 Cal.App.2d 339, 340, 168 P.2d 417; People v. Young, 105 Cal.App.2d 612, 613, 233 P.2d 155; Schaefer [176 Cal.App.2d 97] v. Superior Court, 113 Cal.App.2d 428, 438, 248 P.2d 450. And see 29 Cal.Jur.2d 359, Judg......
-
People v. Washington, Cr. 18584
...578, 591--592, 248 P.2d 12) but to include the employment of a firearm to threaten, as well as to shoot or to strike (People v. Young, 105 Cal.App.2d 612, 614, 233 P.2d 155). Thus, while anyone who uses a firearm must necessarily Page 885 be armed with it the converse need not be true. For ......
-
People v. Spencer, Cr. 20192
...within the meaning of section 12022.5 includes 'display with menace during the course of the robbery.' (See also, People v. Young, 105 Cal.App.2d 612, 233 P.2d Appellant contends that the allegation in the amended information 'that at the time of the commission o the (robbery) said defendan......