People v. Swensen

California Court of Appeal

People v. Swensen

173 P. 934, 37 Cal. App. 262, 1918 Cal. App. LEXIS 260

CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal

DecidedMay 16, 1918

DocketCrim. No. 741.

StatusPublished

This text of 173 P. 934 (People v. Swensen) 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.

Bluebook

People v. Swensen, 173 P. 934, 37 Cal. App. 262, 1918 Cal. App. LEXIS 260 (Cal. Ct. App. 1918).

Pincite

Opinion

THE COURT.

The defendant was accused of committing a lewd act, as denounced in section 288 of the Penal Code, upon the person of a child three and a half years of age. He was convicted of an attempt to commit this crime. He was found in a basement with the child. Her clothes were down. *263 She had a nickel, which she said he gave her. He contradicted this statement. He ran when discovered emerging from the basement, but was pursued and arrested. Various plausible explanations of Ms situation and conduct are offered by his counsel, upon which we are asked to say that the verdict is not sustained by the evidence. All these explanations were by the record presented to the jury. We cannot nor have we any disposition to usurp their functions in determining the truth or falsity of these explanations.

It is also contended that the evidence failed to show an attempt to commit the crime. We think, however, that it is sufficient for this purpose.

Some complaint is made of the refusal of the court to give certain stock instructions requested by the defendant; but these instructions were all given—in different language, it is true—but in effect by the court in its charge to the jury.

The judgment is affirmed.

A petition to have the cause heard in the supreme court, after judgment in the district court of appeal, was denied by the supreme court on July 15, 1918.

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

THE COURT.

The defendant was accused of committing a lewd act, as denounced in section 288 of the Penal Code, upon the person of a child three and a half years of age. He was convicted of an attempt to commit this crime. He was found in a basement with the child. Her clothes were down. *263 She had a nickel, which she said he gave her. He contradicted this statement. He ran when discovered emerging from the basement, but was pursued and arrested. Various plausible explanations of Ms situation and conduct are offered by his counsel, upon which we are asked to say that the verdict is not sustained by the evidence. All these explanations were by the record presented to the jury. We cannot nor have we any disposition to usurp their functions in determining the truth or falsity of these explanations.

It is also contended that the evidence failed to show an attempt to commit the crime. We think, however, that it is sufficient for this purpose.

Some complaint is made of the refusal of the court to give certain stock instructions requested by the defendant; but these instructions were all given—in different language, it is true—but in effect by the court in its charge to the jury.

The judgment is affirmed.

A petition to have the cause heard in the supreme court, after judgment in the district court of appeal, was denied by the supreme court on July 15, 1918.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

173 P. 934, 37 Cal. App. 262, 1918 Cal. App. LEXIS 260, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-swensen-calctapp-1918.