People v. Dragoo

VALLÉE, J.

Defendant appeals from a judgment of conviction of unlawfully furnishing and giving away marijuana in violation of section 11713 of the Health and Safety Code and from the order denying his motion for a new trial. He contends the evidence is insufficient to support the judgment. The contention is without merit.

In the early evening of September 22, 1952, Police Officer Ellena, incognito, seated himself at the bar in a saloon in Pasadena where defendant was employed as a bartender. Defendant had known Ellena about six months. Officer New-land was seated two seats away. Ellena asked defendant to sell him a “joint.” Defendant replied, “Sell, hell, I will give you one—never say I didn’t give you anything.” Defendant then reached in his pocket, pulled out a “brown paper cigarette” and handed it to Ellena. The foregoing was testified to by Ellena. Officer Newland testified he saw defendant reach in his pocket and hand Ellena the cigarette. The eiga

[324]

rette contained marijuana. Defendant denied possession of marijuana and denied giving the cigarette to Ellena.

Defendant argues that he and Ellena had had trouble; that Ellena was biased and prejudiced against him; that the evidence is so improbable and false as to be incredible. These were matters for consideration of the trial court and not for this court. “A reviewing court will not hold unsupported the trial court’s finding of guilt merely because it might reasonably draw different inferences from those the trial court reasonably drew, or might not be convinced beyond a reasonable doubt of the guilt of the defendant.

(People

v.

Kerr,

37 Cal.2d 11, 15 [229 P.2d 777];

People

v.

Tollack,

105 Cal.App.2d 169, 172 [233 P.2d 121].) It is the trier of the fact which must be persuaded beyond a reasonable doubt of the guilt of the defendant.

(People

v.