People v. Dalzell

121 Cal. App. 2d 878
CourtAppellate Division of the Superior Court of California
DecidedNovember 30, 1953
DocketCrim A. No. 16
StatusPublished

This text of 121 Cal. App. 2d 878 (People v. Dalzell) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Superior Court of California primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
People v. Dalzell, 121 Cal. App. 2d 878 (Cal. Ct. App. 1953).

Opinion

THE COURT.

The complaint in this matter charges the defendant with “violation of Sec. 577, Vehicle Code.” It is further alleged that the defendant drove “upon a public highway in the City of Upland, to-wit: 19th Street and Euclid Avenue, West Drive, a vehicle . . . said Highway was then and there sign posted with a sign located at and near the entrance to said highway, having the word ‘Stop’ printed thereon in the manner prescribed by law, and that said defendant did wilfully and unlawfully fail and neglect to stop such vehicle at said sign before entering and crossing said highway and intersection.”

The following statement appears in the docket maintained by the judge of the trial court:

“Defendant admits under oath, the fact that he did not stop at the West Drive of Euclid Avenue and Nineteenth Street and contends that the sign is not placed according to law, if placed pursuant to a City Ordinance and that Euclid Avenue is but one highway.”

The court found the defendant “guilty as charged.”

Section 577 of the Vehicle Code provides:

“The driver of any vehicle upon approaching any entrance of a highway or intersection . . . signposted with a stop sign . . . shall stop:
“(a) Before entering the cross walk on the near side of the intersection or, if none, then at a limit line when marked, otherwise before entering such highway or intersection.” From the statement contained in the docket it is apparent that the only stop which the defendant failed to make was that required by a stop sign directing traffic going easterly along 19th Street at its intersection with the west roadway of Euclid Avenue.

Euclid Avenue consists of two roadways but is only one highway. The boundaries of an intersecting highway constitute the boundary of the intersection contemplated by the Vehicle Code. (Blanton v. Curry, 20 Cal.2d 793 [129 P.2d 1].)

Under the law, as applied to the facts in this case, when the defendant, traveling west on 19th Street, arrived at the west roadway of Euclid Avenue he already was within [880]*880the intersection and his failure to stop at some point within the intersection cannot be held to constitute a violation of Vehicle Code, section 577, which contemplates a failure to stop before entering the intersection.

Under the circumstances, there is no reason to determine whether or not the stop sign which was placed within the intersection but immediately east of the west roadway of Euclid Avenue was validly ■ placed and required motorists intending to cross the west roadway to stop before doing so.

Assuming that the stop sign under consideration was validly placed and that the defendant’s failure to stop before entering the west roadway of Euclid Avenue constituted a violation of Ordinance 354 of the city of Upland, the fact remains that the defendant was not charged with violating said ordinance and, under the complaint filed against him, could not be found guilty of such a violation.

The judgment is reversed.

[881]*881INDEX [References are to pages where headnotes appear. Figures in brackets refer to headnote numbers.] ACCOUNTS Action for Accounting—Judgment, 247 [5] Trial—Findings, 247 [4] ACTIONS Cause of Action, 479 [5] Classification—Determination of Nature, 729 [2] ADVERSE POSSESSION Burden of Proof, 481 [16], [17] Elements, 480 [8] Evidence—Boundaries, 267 [3] Payment of Taxes, 267 [2] Hostility—Relationship of Parties— Cotenants, 479 [6], 480 [9], [12], [13], [14]," [15] ANIMALS Dogs—Liability for Injuries by Dogs, 379 [3] Pleading, 379 [2] Evidence, 379 [1] Police Regulations, 379 [5], [6] APPEAL Briefs—Pointing Out Errors, 162 [6], 711 [4] Stating Points Separately, 661 [4] Decisions Appealable, 76 [7], [8], 684 [1] Change of Venue, 682 [1] Orders Relating to Judgment, 833 [1] Discretion of Lower Court, 281 [8] Dismissal—Determination of Merits, 738 [3] Evidence, 276 [1] Harmless and Reversible Error—Argument of Counsel— Cure by Instruction to Jury, 692 [6] Findings, 328 [26] Instructions, 387 [2] « Misconduct of Counsel, 145 [2] Redirect Examination, 3 [11] Rulings as to Witnesses, 692 [8], [9] Imposition of Damages for Frivolous Appeals, 766 [7] Making Additional Findings, 777 [3] Notice of Appeal—Description of Judgment, 737 [1], [2] (877)

[882]*882878 Index—121 C.A.2d APPEAL—Continued Objections, 167 [3] Adherence to Issues Presented, 33 [3] Application of Buie, 870 [3] Conduct of Judge, 802 [20] Evidence, 800 [7] Pleading, 870 [2] Presenting New Claim for Belief, 33 [2] Theory of Case, 153 [6], 168 [5], 185 [3] Verdict, 367 [3] Presumptions—Orders, 276 [1] Orders on Motion for New Trial, 392 [4] Sufficiency of Evidence, 247 [2] Questions of Law and Fact—Authority of Court, 711 [7] Consideration of Evidence, 745 [2] Evidence Inherently Improbable, 98 [2], [3] Orders on Motion for New Trial, 802 [23] Substantial Evidence Buie, 237 [1], 280 [3], 711 [6], 745 [1] Sufficiency of Evidence, 95 [2] Beeord—Findings—Omission to Find on Issue, 247 [3] Judgment Boll—Matters Beviewable, 247 [1] Opinion of Trial Judge, 281 [6] Beporter’s Transcript—Partial Transcript, 168 [4] Eight to Allege Error—Estoppel, 185 [2], 801 [9] invited Error, 145 [2] Instructions, 801 [16] Waiver, 800 [8] Scope of Beview—Findings, 374 [3] Incompetent Evidence, 353 [5] Taking Additional Evidence, 162 [7] Time to Appeal—Effect of Premature Notice of Appeal, 765 [5] Necessity for Bendition of Judgment, 765 [3], [4] ABBITBATION Appeal—Beview, 492 [7] Award—Construction, 491 [6] Costs, 492 [9] Modification or Vacation, 491 [1], [3] Presumptions, 491 [5] Bequisites—Certainty, 491 [2] Finality—Determining All Matters, 492 [8] Proceedings—Consultation with Outsiders, 491 [4] A.BBEST By Private Person, 211 [1], [2] ATTOENEYS Belation to Client—Assumption of Adverse Position, 617 [5] Substitution of Attorneys, 59 [2], [3], [4]

[883]*883Index—121 C.A.2d 879 AUTOMOBILES Appeal—-Inherent Improbability of Evidence, 98 [1] Driving Near Bight-hand Side, 505 [1], [2], [3], 506 [4], [5] Evidence—Collisions, 352 [1] Last Clear Chance, 353 [4] Negligence of Drivers, 280 [1] Stopping Vehicle—Location of Plaintiff, 280 [2] Indemnity Insurance—Evidence, 206 [1] Use of Other Automobiles—Medical Payments, 856 [5] Instructions—Conduct of Person Injured, 506 [7] Intersections, 874 [1] Last Clear Chance, 353 [6], [7] Offenses Driving While Intoxicated—Appeal—Harmless Error, 55 [2] Evidence—Admissions, 55 [1] Intoxicated Driving Besulting in Injury, 717 [1] Presumptions, 506 [6] Province of Court and Jury—Contributory Negligence, 145 [1] Stopping Before Entering Highway, 874 [2] BOUND ABIES Establishment—By Acquiescence—Effect of Mistake, 267 [1] Evidence, 267 [4] BBOKEBS Compensation—As Dependent on Consummation of Transaction, 851 [1] Pleading, 136 [6] Befusal of Owner to Consummate Sale, 136 [4] Bight of Action and Defenses, 136 [5] Duties, 85 [6] Licenses—Persons Bequired to be Licensed, '84 [1] Bevocation, 85 [7] Hearing, 85 [4] Judicial Beview, 84 [2], 85 [3], [5] BUBGLABY Evidence, 595 [1] Accomplices and Corroboration, 595 [2] Identity, 466 [3] Possession of Deadly Weapon, 596 [3] Province of Court and Jury—Identity, 466 [2] CANCELLATION Mistake, 666 [5] CIVIL SEE VICE Discharge and Dismissal—Judicial Beview, 813 [2]

[884]

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

Related

Blanton v. Curry
129 P.2d 1 (California Supreme Court, 1942)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
121 Cal. App. 2d 878, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-dalzell-calappdeptsuper-1953.