People v. Cortez

MARKS, J.

Appellant was charged, by an information filed by the district attorney of Fresno County, with the crime of possession by an unnaturalized foreign-born person of a firearm capable of being concealed about his person. The jury returned a verdict of guilty' and judgment was pronounced upon him. His motion for a new trial was denied. This appeal was taken from the, judgment .and from the order denying the motion for a new trial.

Appellant presents but one ground upon which he urges a reversal of the judgment. Evidence was introduced of the arrest of appellant and the finding of the firearm in his possession. Over his objection the People were permitted to introduce an extrajudicial statement made by him in which he admitted his foreign nativity and that he had

[23]

not been naturalized. This ruling is complained of by him. He maintains that while section 1983 of the Code of Civil Procedure places upon him the burden of proving, either that he was not a foreign-born person, or that if foreign-born, he was naturalized, this section does not change the rule announced in the case of

People

v.

Quarez,

196 Cal. 404 [238 Pac. 363], that the extrajudicial statements of a defendant cannot be used to establish any part of the

corpus delicti

of the crime charged. He urges that the People, as a part of the

corpus delicti,

must prove both alienage and lack of naturalization, as well as possession of the weapon.

The Quarez case was decided before the adoption of section 1983 of the Code of Civil Procedure. To hold that the People must prove alienage and- lack of naturalization in cases of this kind, as a part of the

corpus delicti,

would in effect nullify the provisions of this section. This contention of appellant has been decided adversely to him in the cases of