People v. Garrow

California Court of Appeal Dec 16, 1959 No. Crim. 6654Published

Before: Scott

AI Brief

AI-generated · verify before citing

Holding. The court affirmed the defendant's conviction for violating Penal Code section 288, holding that the evidence was sufficient to support the judgment and that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in determining the competency of the child witness.

Issues

Whether the trial court abused its discretion in permitting a child under the age of 10 to testify.
Whether the testimony of the complaining witness required corroboration in a prosecution under Penal Code section 288.
Whether the defendant's out-of-court admissions were properly admitted into evidence.

Disposition. Affirmed

Quotations verified verbatim against the opinion

“In a prosecution under section 288 of the Penal Code defining the offense of which the defendant was convicted it is not required that the testimony of the complaining witness shall be corroborated.”

SCOTT, J. pro tem.

Defendant was charged with the crime of violating section 288 of the Penal Code and after trial by the court without a jury was found guilty as charged, having committed lewd and lascivious acts upon the body of a 9-year-old girl. Prior to this determination, his sanity was questioned by the court and after trial on that issue defendant was found to be sane. After his guilt was ascertained he was found to be a sexual psychopath and was committed to Atascadero State Hospital for a 90-day observation period. When he was returned from there, probation was denied and he was sent to state prison. From judgment of conviction defendant appeals. He also attempts to appeal from the verdict, but no appeal lies therefrom. That attempted appeal is dismissed.

(People

Goldstein,

136 Cal.App.2d 778, 793 [289 P.2d 581].)

Although he was represented by counsel at the trial of his ease, defendant appears in propria persona on this appeal and his protest is not fully understandable. We have, therefore, considered the entire testimony in the ease and the procedural matters concerning which defendant may have intended to express some misgivings.

In June 1958 when a 9-year-old girl appeared at defendant’s door selling Sunday papers, he invited her into the house, closed and locked the door, removed part of her clothing and his own, committed the lewd acts charged and later released her. When she saw her mother the child made a complaint

[271]

to her that she had received mistreatment of a sexual nature. When defendant was arrested he admitted lewd acts committed on the child and the arousing of his own sexual desires. At the trial defendant denied committing the offense and denied admitting having done so.

The fact that a complaint was made by the child concerning the defendant’s wrongful acts was admissible upon the theory that it is a spontaneous exhibition, without compulsion, of the victim’s physical condition or mental attitude following the perpetration of an unusual and unnautral act

(People

People v. Garrow

AI Brief

More from California Court of Appeal

Related research

AI Brief