People v. Madison

Opinion

COBEY, Acting P. J.

Sonja Madison appeals from a judgment of conviction of simple battery, a misdemeanor. (Pen. Code, § 242.) The two grounds of appeal are: (1) Insufficiency of the evidence; and (2) the inclu

[986]

sion in the superior court file of a summary report for own recognizance release. The appeal is without merit.

The Facts

At approximately 5:50 p.m., March 4, 1968, L. R. Adams, an off-duty Los Angeles police officer in civilian clothes, employed as a security officer by the Broadway Department Stores, saw appellant enter the Crenshaw store. She was carrying a large straw purse. She proceeded immediately to the Misses’ sportswear department, removed two dresses from the rack, rolled them up, and put them in her purse. She then walked across the store toward the exit. About 10 feet from the exit she saw Adams. She immediately turned around, went back to the sportswear section and removed another dress from the rack.

At this point Adams verbally identified himself to appellant as a Los Angeles police officer and displayed his police badge to her. He told appellant he would like to talk to her about the merchandise in her purse. She replied, “You’re not talking to me” and walked rapidly to the dressing room. Adams followed her there where she opened her purse and threw the three dresses on the floor. Adams told her she was under arrest for shoplifting and that he was going to handcuff her. She thereupon told him to get out of her way and tried to get past him. She kicked Adams on the left leg and scratched him about the face and on his right hand as he was attempting to handcuff her.

1

Sufficiency of the Evidence

On this appeal this court must view the evidence most favorably to the People and presume in support of the judgment of conviction the existence of every fact which the trier could reasonably deduce from the evidence.

(People

v.

Redmond,

71 Cal.2d 745, 755 [79 Cal.Rptr. 529, 457 P.2d 321].) “The test on appeal is whether there is substantial evidence to support the conclusion of the trier of fact; it is not whether guilt is established beyond a reasonable doubt.”