People v. Bookhammer

California Court of Appeal Dec 13, 1963 No. Crim. 4357Published

Before: Salsman

AI Brief

AI-generated · verify before citing

Holding. The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the conviction for attempted robbery, finding that the identification testimony was a matter for the trier of fact and that there was no evidence of witness suppression or judicial misconduct.

Issues

Whether the evidence was sufficient to support the conviction for attempted robbery.
Whether the prosecution's failure to call all potential witnesses constituted a wilful suppression of evidence.
Whether the trial judge committed misconduct through his examination of witnesses or alleged bias regarding a prosecution witness.

Disposition. Affirmed

Quotations verified verbatim against the opinion

“it is the function of the trier of fact to pass upon the strength or weakness of the identification testimony, and to resolve that issue.”

“The prosecution was not bound to call every witness who might have had something to say on the question of identification.”

“We find nothing here to suggest the slightest impropriety on the part of the trial judge”

SALSMAN, J.

Appellant was charged with attempted robbery, tried before the court without a jury, convicted, and appeals from the judgment. Since one of appellant’s contentions is that the evidence is insufficient to support the judgment we set forth the facts as they appear in the record.

On April 30, 1962, at about 2:15 a.m., two patrons, one Harry Coater and the other Mrs. Bersell, left the Wishing Well bar in Castro Valley. William Pehr, also a patron, and Louis Ridgway, the bartender, followed. Coater and Mrs. Bersell were stopped by two men, one of whom wore a mask and had a gun. The armed and masked man announced a holdup and demanded that everyone return to the bar. Ridg

[280]

way was ordered to open the door. He pretended to drop his keys, and in picking them up struck the masked man in the face. A general encounter then took place, during which the masked man lost his mask, and Ridgway got a look at him. Later Ridgway was rendered unconscious by a blow on the head, and the two robbers fled.

Warren Breilh lived about a mile from the Wishing Well bar. He testified that appellant and a companion came to his home in the latter part of April 1962, some time after 2 a.m. They told him they had been in a fight at the Wishing Well bar and asked him to drive them to San Leandro, some 7 or 8 miles distant, where they had parked their car.

About two weeks after the attempted robbery, Ridgway picked out appellant’s picture from a police file, and still later picked out appellant from a police lineup. At trial Ridgway positively identified appellant as the masked man with whom he had struggled at the scene of the attempted robbery. At trial Mr. Fehr also made a partial identification of appellant by giving a description of the robber’s height, weight, color and hair color. His description was similar to that given by Ridgway and generally described appellant.

This brief statement of the evidence before the trial judge is entirely sufficient to support the judgment. We must look at the evidence in the light most favorable to respondent

(People

People v. Bookhammer

AI Brief

SALSMAN, J.

More from California Court of Appeal

Related research

AI Brief