People v. Allen
Before: Edmonds
EDMONDS, J.
With the exception of testimony concerning messages received by telephone, the evidence upon which Joseph Allen was convicted of violating section 337a of the Penal Code is substantially the same as that which was presented in the ease of
People
v.
Vertlieb (post,
p. 193 [137 P.2d 437]). And, as in the Vertlieb case, the prosecution used a scratch sheet for the purpose of establishing the character of the paraphernalia found in the appellant’s place of business.
The appellant and Henry E. Cosgrove were charged in an information having three counts. First it was alleged that they kept and occupied a store with books and papers and paraphernalia for the purpose of recording bets upon horse
[192]
races. The next count asserted that they received and held money bet upon horse races. The recording of bets upon horse races was the basis of the last count.
Upon a trial, the only witness was a police officer called by the prosecution. He testified that when he entered a cigar store he saw Allen standing behind the counter. Cos-grove, on the outside of the counter and near the cash register, laid down some money. As the witness came by him, Cosgrove grabbed a piece of paper from the counter and tore it in half. At the same time, Allen grabbed several pieces of paper and put them in his pocket. The money, $2, was left on the counter.
Allen and Cosgrove were placed under arrest. The officer found a scratch sheet of that date and blank pads which had sheets similar in size and shape to the one torn up by Cosgrove. These articles, with certain papers taken from the safe, were received in evidence.
The officer testified that he. was familiar with the manner in which bookmaking is customarily conducted in Los Angeles county and that the exhibits include betting markers. The symbols appearing on one of them, he said, indicate that a person identified by the initials C. J. made a bet on two particular horses, one to win and one to place. The significance of names and numbers on other exhibits was similarly explained. The meaning of the data appearing on the markers was obtained, in part, from a scratch sheet which was not found at the cigar stand but was identified as a publication “used by horseplayers.”
More from California Supreme Court
- People v. Wende (1979)
- People v. Watson (1956)
- People v. Superior Court (Romero) (1996)
- People v. Kelly (2006)
- Auto Equity Sales, Inc. v. Superior Court (1962)
- Aguilar v. Atlantic Richfield Co. (2001)
- People v. Lewis (2021)
- In Re Estrada (1965)
- Denham v. Superior Court (1970)
- People v. Marsden (1970)