People v. Mohr

DORAN, J.

Pound guilty by a jury of the offenses set forth in sections 288 and 278 of the Penal Code, the defendant appeals from the judgment as well as from the order denying a motion for a new trial.

Briefly, it appears from the record that on the morning of April 9, 1937, one Dolores, a girl four years of age, was attending her younger sister and was playing with other children in front of the family home at Thirty-seventh Street and Maple Avenue in the city of Los Angeles. Her eight-year-old brother, Leonard, was also present. About 9:45 A. M. Leonard discovered Dolores leaving in an automobile; she was seated in the front seat with the driver, a stranger. Leonard immediately ran into the house and told his mother, who in turn promptly informed the police. With the exception of the defendant’s confession, there is no evidence of the whereabouts of the child until, at 11:15 A. M. of the same day, she appeared in a store three miles from her home and sought to purchase a penny box of matches. At this time and place strangers recognized the child’s plight and informed the police. She was returned to her home about 2:30 P. M. of the same day.

It is urged by appellant that there is no evidence of “child stealing”, the term given to the offense described in

[582]

section 278 of the Penal Code, and that therefore the

corpus delicti

of the offense was not established; for this reason, appellant argues, defendant’s confession was improperly admitted.

It is elementary that the

corpus delicti

need only be established by

prima facie

evidence, and it follows from the facts briefly recited above that the evidence of the

corpus delicti

more than meets the requirements of the rule.

It is also -contended by appellant that there is not sufficient evidence to prove the