People v. Day

159 P. 457, 30 Cal. App. 762, 1916 Cal. App. LEXIS 467
California Court of Appeal·Decided June 15, 1916·No. Crim. No. 622.·Published·Cited by 7 cases

Opinion

We find from a review of the record that the evidence in this case sufficiently supports the verdict; that even if the evidence warranted and would have supported a charge of burglary upon the theory that the defendant was an accessory thereto, nevertheless it also shows that the defendant *Page 763 subsequently received the fruits of the burglary from the actual perpetrator thereof knowing them to be stolen; that as a consequence he was guilty of receiving stolen goods; that therefore he cannot be heard to complain that the people elected to charge him with the latter offense rather than with the former. We further find that the testimony of the admitted accomplice of the defendant in the commission of the crime charged was amply corroborated by other and independent evidence, and that there was no error in the charge of the court or in its refusal to give certain instructions requested upon behalf of the defendant.

Upon these grounds the judgment and order appealed from are affirmed.

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

People v. Day, 159 P. 457, 30 Cal. App. 762, 1916 Cal. App. LEXIS 467 (Cal. Ct. App. 1916).

159 P. 457 (People v. Day) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

People v. Donnell
52 Cal. App. 3d 762 (California Court of Appeal, 1975)
People v. Briggs
19 Cal. App. 3d 1034 (California Court of Appeal, 1971)
People v. Kot
339 P.2d 899 (California Court of Appeal, 1959)
People v. Stoddard
119 P.2d 160 (California Court of Appeal, 1941)
People v. Warren
97 P.2d 464 (California Court of Appeal, 1939)
People v. Taylor
40 P.2d 870 (California Court of Appeal, 1935)
Leon v. State
189 P. 433 (Arizona Supreme Court, 1920)