People v. Noorlander

DORAN, J.

Defendant was adjudged guilty of grand theft with a prior conviction of a felony and appeals from the judgment.

The information alleged the theft of an automobile.

The trial was before the court without a jury. By stipulation, the People’s case was submitted upon the transcript of the proceedings at the preliminary hearing. Defendant and defendant’s mother testified for the defense at the trial.

[275]

It is contended on appeal that,

‘11. The trial Court was without jurisdiction to proceed with the trial upon stipulation of counsel that the evidence at the preliminary examination be considered as evidence at the trial without confronting defendant with the witnesses against him.

“II. The Court erred in failing to consider that defendant did not avoid arrest and waited for the police for two days.

“III. The evidence is insufficient to sustain the judgment.

“IV. The trial Court erred failing to have appellant’s sanity determined after the question had been raised and a doctor appointed to make a sanity report to the Court.

“V. The prior felony conviction alleged in the information and found to be true by the Court cannot operate to increase appellant’s minimum term of imprisonment.”

The record of the trial reveals, in part, the following:

“The Court: The People against Walter 0. Noorlander.

1 ‘Mr. Warner ; In regard to this matter, we can now submit the transcript to the Court to read, and then put on the defendant and call another witness. I believe the officer’s testimony will be substantially the same. I have gone over the transcript several times, and I don’t believe it will add anything to put them on the stand.

‘ ‘ The Court : Mr. Noorlander, do you waive your right to a trial by jury?

“The Defendant: Yes, sir.