People v. Brush

194 Cal. App. 2d 771, 15 Cal. Rptr. 193, 1961 Cal. App. LEXIS 1877
California Court of Appeal·Decided August 16, 1961·No. Crim. 3112·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

VAN DYKE, P. J.

This is an appeal from a judgment entered upon a jury’s verdict which found appellant guilty of arson and two counts of burglary.

The public defender who represented appellant at his trial filed a notice of appeal on his behalf, but later advised this court that after a review of the entire transcript he found no sufficient grounds to prosecute the appeal. Nevertheless, upon appellant’s request for counsel, we appointed Richard Backus, Esquire, to represent him. Mr. Backus has advised the court that he found no error upon which a meritorious appeal could be based. After an independent review of the record, we have reached the same conclusion.

The testimony of appellant’s two accomplices and the extrajudicial statements of appellant so overwhelmingly estab *772 lish his guilt that the jury would have been remiss in its duty if it had failed to convict him. There were no errors in law.

The purported appeal from an order denying a new trial is dismissed as no motion for a new trial was made. The judgment is affirmed.

Peek, J., and Warne, J. pro tem., * * concurred.

*

Assigned by Chairman of Judicial Council.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

People v. Brush, 194 Cal. App. 2d 771, 15 Cal. Rptr. 193, 1961 Cal. App. LEXIS 1877 (Cal. Ct. App. 1961).

194 Cal. App. 2d 771 (People v. Brush) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

People v. Bowman
240 Cal. App. 2d 358 (California Court of Appeal, 1966)