People v. Carillo

CRAIG, J.

This is an appeal from a judgment after verdict of guilty rendered by a jury against the defendant upon both counts of an information charging the crimes of assault with intent to commit rape and burglary, wherein the jury found the burglary to he that of the second degree. Appellant asserts that the trial court erroneously re

[148]

fused to give fifteen instructions requested by him. However, he has failed in his briefs to do more than quote the offered instructions and to assert that because of the omission to give them his rights were substantially prejudiced.

A careful reading of the entire charge given by the trial court to the jury discloses that the principles of law involved as pertaining to the issues in this case were fully and correctly stated. This being so, it was unnecessary to repeat them in the language of the instructions requested by appellant.

It is seriously urged that “where there is one scintilla of evidence going to the fact that a confession was not free and voluntary” it is no longer discretionary with the trial judge to admit, or sustain objection to the admission of, an alleged confession. It is admitted that the effect of the testimony of one witness for the prosecution was that the confession was entirely free and voluntary. No authorities are cited by appellant to sustain his novel position. It is elementary that it is within the peculiar province of a trial court to pass upon the admissibility of evidence tending to show a confession. This is true wherever the record contains evidence which substantially supports the ruling of the trial court.

(People

v.

Graff,

61 Cal. App. 7 [214 Pac. 273];

People

v.

Fonts,

61 Cal. App. 242 [214 Pac.

657]; People

v.