Pillod v. People
| Decision Date | 06 December 1948 |
| Docket Number | 16032. |
| Citation | 119 Colo. 116,200 P.2d 919 |
| Parties | PILLOD v. PEOPLE. |
| Court | Colorado Supreme Court |
Error to District Court, Mesa County; Paul L. Littler, Judge.
Fred S Pillod was convicted of having taken indecent liberties with two girls, aged six and seven years respectively, and he brings error.
Affirmed.
Moynihan Hughes-Sherman, of Montrose, for plaintiff in error.
H Lawrence Hinkley, Atty. Gen., Duke W. Dunbar, Deputy Atty Gen. and James S. Henderson, Asst. Atty. Gen., for defendant in error.
Fred S. Pillod, plaintiff in error, to whom we hereinafter refer as defendant, was charged in two separate informations with the crime of taking indecent liberties with two little girls, aged six and seven years respectively. With the consent of defendant, the cases were consolidated for trial, at the conclusion of which the jury returned verdicts finding him guilty in each case. His motion for a new trial was overruled, he was sentenced to the penitentiary, and now brings the case here for review, alleging errors which we consider in the order discussed by his counsel.
On the afternoon of October 4, 1947, defendant and other workmen were engaged in remodeling his house in Grand Junction; about 4:30 p. m. he ceased work in order to water a tree in front of the house; he attached the hose, placed the end in a hole by the tree, then returned and sat down on the top step of the porch of the house and waited for the hole to fill with water. At the time, the two little girls involved herein were playing around his house and yard, as they did frequently. These facts are admitted. The children, called as witnesses, testified that while defendant was sitting on the steps, he motioned to them to come and sit by him; that they did so, and thereupon defendant took certain indecent liberties with their persons; that they then went in on the porch of defendant's house, where he seated himself on a couch, while they sat on two chairs nearby; that defendant asked them in turn to come and lay down on the couch; that they did so and that he performed on each of them 'the most disgusting and unspeakable indignities'; that he warned them not to say anything to anybody about what had occurred; that the six-year-child, however, did tell one of her friends of the experience she had had, and this girl, being somewhat older, told her mother and the children's mothers what she had learned, thereby disclosing the facts upon which this prosecution is predicated.
I. The verdict is supported by the evidence.
It is first contended that the two children, six and seven years of age respectively, were not shown to be competent to testify. The statute of Colorado provides that the following shall not be witnesses: 'Second--Children under ten years of age who appear incapable of receiving just impressions of the facts respecting which they are examined or of relating them truly.' ' 35 C.S.A., Vol. 4, c. 177, § 8. We have held that, 'the competency of a child as a witness under the prescribed age is a question addressed to the sound discretion of the trial court to determine.' City of Victor v. Smilanich, 54 Colo. 479, 483, 131 P. 392, 394. Each child in the case at bar was given a preliminary examination, after which the trial court expressed no doubt as to their competency as witnesses. We have examined the record and are satisfied that the court did not abuse its discretion in permitting the two children to testify. Then, too, no objection was made to their testifying; no motion was made to strike the testimony given, and in the motion for a new trial there is no allegation that their evidence was incompetent or that they were not qualified to testify. As we said in Holm v. People, 72 Colo. 257, 258, 210 P. 698:
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Com. v. Brenner
...Osborne, [1905] 1 K.B. 551, 558-559; People v. Burton, 55 Cal.2d 328, 351, 11 Cal.Rptr. 65, 359 P.2d 433 (1961); Pillod v. People, 119 Colo. 116, 119-120, 200 P.2d 919 (1948); People v. Bonneau, 323 Mich. 237, 240, 35 N.W.2d 161 (1948); State v. Balles, 47 N.J. 331, 221 A.2d 1 (1966), appea......
-
Jordan v. People
...the witness was competent. Hood v. People, 130 Colo. 531, 277 P.2d 223; Wesner v. People, 126 Colo. 400, 250 P.2d 124; Pillod v. People, 119 Colo. 116, 200 P.2d 919; Brasher v. People, 81 Colo. 113, 253 P. 827; City of Victor v. Smilanich, 54 Colo. 479, 131 P. In his fourth assignment of er......
-
Berger v. People
...54 Colo. 479, 131 P. 392; Holm v. People, 72 Colo. 257, 210 P. 698; Brasher v. People, 81 Colo. 113, 253 P. 827; Pillod v. People, 119 Colo. 116, 200 P.2d 919; Warren v. People, 121 Colo. 118, 213 P.2d We conclude that no error was committed in permitting Robert to testify; that his evidenc......
-
State v. Gambutti, A--291
...of six, and seven-year-old children in a prosecution for taking indecent liberties with their persons (Pillod v. People, 119 Colo. 116, 200 P.2d 919 (Sup.Ct.1948); People v. Bonneau, 323 Mich. 237, 35 N.W.2d 161 (Sup.Ct.1948); Bridges v. State, 247 Wis. 350, 19 N.W.2d 529 Of course, the bas......
-
ARTICLE 90 WITNESSES
...to the sound discretion of the trial court to determine. Victor v. Smilanich, 54 Colo. 479, 131 P. 392 (1913); Pillod v. People, 119 Colo. 116, 200 P.2d 919 (1948); Wesner v. People, 126 Colo. 400, 250 P.2d 124 (1952); Hood v. People, 130 Colo. 531, 277 P.2d 223 (1954); Harris v. People, 17......
-
Chapter 42 - § 42.22 • WITNESSES INCOMPETENT BY REASON OF INFANCY
...277 P.2d 223 (Colo. 1954); Wesner v. People, 250 P.2d 124 (Colo. 1952); Berger v. People, 224 P.2d 228 (Colo. 1956); Pillod v. People, 200 P.2d 919 (Colo. 1948); City of Victor v. Smilanich, 131 P. 392 (Colo. 1913); Jordan v. People, 419 P.2d 656 (Colo. 1966); Marn v. People, 486 P.2d 424 (......