People v. Van Wagoner

California Court of Appeal Oct 4, 1961 No. Crim. 1592Published

Before: Shepard

AI Brief

AI-generated · verify before citing

Holding. The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the defendant's conviction for grand theft and that no prejudicial error occurred during the trial.

Issues

Whether the evidence was sufficient to support the judgment of conviction for grand theft.
Whether the defendant is entitled to a new trial based on the potential to perfect an alibi.

Disposition. affirmed

Quotations verified verbatim against the opinion

“The evidence was clearly sufficient to support the judgment of conviction.”

“The corpus delicti may be established by circumstantial evidence and inferences fairly and reasonably dedueible therefrom.”

“Our review indicates that defendant received a full and fair trial and active and adequate representation by defense counsel.”

SHEPARD, J.

Defendant appeals in propria persona from a judgment of conviction pursuant to a verdict of guilty of grand theft. (Pen. Code, § 487.)

Facts

Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the judgment, as we must

(People

Love,

53 Cal.2d 843, 850 [1-2] [3 Cal.Rptr. 665, 350 P.2d 705]), the pertinent facts disclosed by the record before us are substantially as follows: Harvey J. Chernack, in September 1960, purchased a 1955 red two-door Chevrolet automobile from defendant. Wednesday, December 28, 1960, at about 6 p. m., Chernack parked the car in front of his parents’ home at 3908 Beechwood Drive, Riverside, California. Next afternoon Chernack found his car about half a block away from where he parked it. The special dualquad Carter carburetors, Corvette four-speed syncro-mesh transmission, distributor, air cleaners, drive shaft and numerous wires had been removed. Fair market value of the stolen items was $275 with a replacement cost of $677.50.

Defendant was part owner of the V & R Speed and Sport Shop in Arlington, California, near Riverside. On the morning of December 29, 1960, defendant did not arrive until about an hour after the shop opened. In the meantime Victor DeLorenzo, Jr., an employee, had noticed fresh red paint on the vise and work bench in the shop, and questioned defendant. Defendant at first attempted to brush the questions off, but finally stated that the night before he had taken the four-speed transmission and the carburetors off of Chernack’s ear. When DeLorenzo said that it was a stupid thing to do, defendant responded that he did not think it would be found out. The newly painted transmission was in the shop loft. On the same day, Kenneth Willie, defendant’s partner, saw in the shop the transmission, carburetors and other stolen equipment. Defendant admitted to Willie that he had removed this equipment from Chernack’s car the night before. Later

[128]

the transmission and carburetors were offered for sale by defendant to Burton Tilden, and Tilden bought the transmission.

People v. Van Wagoner

AI Brief

SHEPARD, J.

More from California Court of Appeal

Related research

AI Brief