Tafoya v. People
| Decision Date | 11 December 1961 |
| Docket Number | No. 20025,20025 |
| Citation | 366 P.2d 860,148 Colo. 532 |
| Parties | Juan A. TAFOYA, Jr., Plaintiff in Error, v. PEOPLE of the State of Colorado, Defendant in Error. |
| Court | Colorado Supreme Court |
Juan A. Tafoya, plaintiff in error, pro se.
Duke W. Dunbar, Atty. Gen., Frank E. Hickey, Deputy Atty. Gen., J. F. Brauer, Asst. Atty. Gen., for defendant in error.
Plaintiff in error as defendant in the trial court was charged by information with the crime of forgery. Trial to a jury resulted in conviction. Motion for a new trial was denied and the defendant was sentenced to a term in the penitentiary. From the judgment and sentence defendant seeks review here by writ of error.
Defendant contends (1) that the court should have granted a directed verdict of acquittal at the close of the People's case, and (2) that the verdict of the jury was contrary to the evidence.
One Ramirez, testifying for the People, identified the defendant as the man who was in his tavern on November 14, 1959 having a beer. Ramirez stated that after buying the beer the defendant asked him to cash a payroll check and presented to him identification in the form of a driver's license. Ramirez watched the defendant endorse the check and thereupon handed the defendant the full face amount of the check in the sum of $87.43. This check was dishonored by the Denver U. S. National Bank on November 17, 1959 on the grounds that the signature was unauthorized. The check had been drawn on the account of the Capitol Hill Blue Print Company, Inc. and made payable to the defendant Juan A. Tafoya, Jr. The check was signed by L. H. Perkins and there was testimony by the owners of the Capitol Hill Blue Print Company, Inc. that no one by that name had ever been authorized to write checks for the company and that they knew no one of that name. There was further testimony that the blank upon which the check had been written had been stolen from the company. A handwriting expert was presented and identified writing of the defendant as identical with that of the endorsement on the check.
At the close of the People's case the defendant moved for a dismissal which was denied. The defendant then took the stand and claimed that he had never been in Ramirez' tavern and had never cashed the check in question. On this state of the evidence the question of the defendant's guilt was submitted to the jury and the jury returned a verdict of guilty.
Defendant argues that the state failed to produce the driver's license which Ramirez said he had seen; that the state failed to produce witnesses to destroy the defendant's alibi that he was working at the time he was supposed to have been in the tavern; that the state failed to produce weather reports...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
People v. Woll, 24758
...light most favorable to the People, it supports the verdict of the jury. Bennett v. People, 155 Colo. 101, 392 P.2d 657; Tafoya v. People, 148 Colo. 532, 366 P.2d 860. II. In the second argument for reversal, defendant contends that the trial court erred in allowing the district attorney to......
-
Duncan v. People
...drawn against Duncan's account as Duncan's writing. These circumstances made a Prima facie case on this issue. See Tafoya v. People, 148 Colo. 532, 366 P.2d 860. Where a Prima facie case is properly made, the jury is the trier of fact and the judge of the credibility of the witnesses and of......
-
Stewart v. People, 24098
...not be set aside when adequately supported by the evidence, even though a portion of that evidence may be in conflict. Tafoya v. People, 148 Colo. 532, 366 P.2d 860 (1961). Judgment MAX C. WILSON, District Judge, * participated. PRINGLE, C.J., and KELLEY, J., not participating. * District J......