People v. Redmond
This text of 15 P.2d 188 (People v. Redmond) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering California Court of Appeal primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
Defendant was tried before the court sitting without a jury upon an information charging the theft of an automobile. He was found guilty as charged and his motion for a new trial was denied.
The defendant was the owner of a Chevrolet sedan, 1927 model, which he drove into a certain parking station in the city of Oakland. He left his car and walked over to a Chevrolet coupe, 1926 model, and started to drive away in this car when arrested. The Chevrolet coupe was locked and in order to take possession the defendant broke the outside lock on the door. His only defense to the charge was that he was subject to absent-mindedness resulting from a disease from which he was suffering. The trial of the case below and the burden of this appeal were both addressed to the simple issue of fact whether this excuse was a sufficient defense to the admitted evidence of the guilt of the defendant. No question of law is involved.
We have examined the entire record and find no error.
The judgment and the order denying the new trial are affirmed.
Sturtevant, J., and Spence, J., concurred.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
15 P.2d 188, 127 Cal. App. 145, 1932 Cal. App. LEXIS 274, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-redmond-calctapp-1932.