People v. Huggins

[1656]

Opinion

SIMS, Acting P. J.

Following the denial of his motion for judgment of acquittal at the close of the prosecution’s case (Pen. Code, §1118.1),

1

defendant Christopher Blair Huggins was convicted by jury of grand theft from the person. (§ 487, subd. (c).)

Sentenced to state prison, defendant appeals, contending his motion for acquittal should have been granted. We shall affirm the judgment.

Facts

The relevant prosecution evidence showed the following.

On May 16, 1995, Caroline Castellanos went to Cali Nails Salon in Stockton to get a fingernail repaired.

She sat down in a chair and put her purse on the floor. She put her foot against the purse to make sure she knew where it was. The purse was in contact with her foot the entire time.

Defendant came running toward her, grabbed the purse, and ran out the door.

Discussion

The standard applied by a trial court in ruling upon a motion for judgment of acquittal pursuant to section 1118.1 is the same as the standard applied by an appellate court in reviewing the sufficiency of the evidence to support a conviction, that is, whether from the evidence including all reasonable inferences to be drawn therefrom, there is any substantial evidence of the existence of each element of the offense charged.

(People

v.

Crittenden

(1994) 9 Cal.4th 83, 139, in. 13 [36 Cal.Rptr.2d 474, 885 P.2d 887];

People

v.

Ainsworth

(1988) 45 Cal.3d 984, 1022 [248 Cal.Rptr. 568, 755 P.2d 1017].)

Section 487 provides in pertinent part: “Grand theft is theft committed in any of the following cases: [¶] ... [¶] (c) When the property is taken from the person of another.”