People v. Flowers

PEEK, P. J.

Defendant appeals from a judgment of conviction finding him guilty of a violation of section 11501 of the Health and Safety Code.

George Allen, a Sacramento Police Officer, who had been assigned to the narcotics detail, testified that at approximately 3 .-15 p. m. on May 10, 1960, he was sitting on a bench watching a game of pool in an establishment located on Third Street in Sacramento when defendant approached him. Allen, addressing defendant, said “Let’s get one,” having in mind a bottle of whiskey. Defendant responded by asking Allen, “What do you want, a spoon?” To this Allen replied that he would rather have half a spoon. Defendant then made a telephone call. When he returned, Allen told him that he had changed his mind and would rather have a spoon instead of half a spoon. Defendant made another telephone call.

Upon completion of the call, Allen, defendant, a man known as “Funny” who was seated next to Allen, and a fourth person whom Allen could not identify left the poolhall and, using Allen’s car, drove to Broderick in Tolo County. When they reached Broderick, defendant asked for the money. Allen and the fourth man each gave defendant $50. After receiving the money, defendant went in front of a grocery store and returned to the car approximately five to ten minutes later. He gave the unidentified fourth man a spoon and Allen two packages, each allegedly containing half a spoon. They then drove to “Funny’s” apartment in Sacramento where they spent several hours. Allen left the group at “Funny’s” apartment and reported the transaction to Officer Viegas.

The packages Allen received from defendant were turned over to a chemist in the Bureau of Narcotic Enforcement, who determined that the packages contained heroin.

Defendant appeals on the ground that there was no evidence that any act of the offense charged occurred within Sacramento County, and hence, the Superior Court of that county lacked jurisdiction under section 781 of the Penal Code. There is no dispute that the money for the sale was passed in Tolo County; but defendant maintains that there'

[313]

is nothing in the record to show that the preliminary arrangements for the sale occurred in Sacramento.