People v. Natale

SALSMAN, J.

The defendant was indicted hy the grand jury of San Mateo County and accused of a felony in each

[155]

of two counts: (1) the murder of Vivian Natale, his wife, and (2) the murder of Prances Natale, his daughter, each offense in violation of section 187 of the Penal Code.

After a jury trial the defendant was found guilty on both counts and the degree of the murder was fixed as second degree. This appeal is from the judgment.

The defendant first contends the evidence is insufficient to justify each of the verdicts of guilty of second degree murder. We do not here set forth the facts in detail. The briefs of the parties contain references to most of the material facts, and what is not contained in the briefs is to be found in the 11 volumes of 2,384 pages of the reporter’s transcript. We have examined the record and we find substantial evidence to support the verdict of the jury as to each count. It would serve no useful purpose to encumber this opinion with the facts and circumstances in evidence upon which this statement is based. (See

Koeberle

v.

Hotchkiss,

8 Cal.App.2d 634 [48 P.2d 104];

People

v.

Groves,

9 Cal.App.2d 317 [49 P.2d 888, 50 P.2d 813];

Thatch

v.

Livingston,

13 Cal.App.2d 202 [56 P.2d 549];

People

v.

Young,

26 Cal.App.2d 700 [80 P.2d 138].)

The defendant contends that the trial court abused its discretion in denying at the commencement of the trial his motion to enter a dual plea of not guilty and not guilty by reason of insanity. Two days before the date on which the trial began counsel for the defendant was given a statement of the defendant made to a police officer one week after the homicides. The defendant contends that the nature of this statement was such that there may have been a question relating to his sanity, and for this reason the court should have allowed him to withdraw his plea of not guilty and to enter a plea of not guilty and not guilty by reason of insanity.