People v. Tanner (1918) · DecisionDepot

People v. Tanner

Name: California Superior Court Tentative Rulings
Creator: DecisionDepot
License: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/

California Court of Appeal Jan 21, 1918 No. Crim. No. 420.Published

Before: Burnett

AI Brief

AI-generated · verify before citing

Holding. The court held that the admission of evidence regarding the defendants' affiliation with the I.W.W. was not prejudicial error because the trial court provided specific instructions to the jury to disregard such evidence, and the evidence was otherwise sufficient to support the robbery conviction.

Issues

Whether the trial court erred in admitting evidence regarding the defendants' membership in the I.W.W.
Whether the district attorney committed misconduct by referencing the defendants' membership in the I.W.W.
Whether the evidence was sufficient to support the verdict of robbery.

Disposition. affirmed

Quotations verified verbatim against the opinion

“The truth or falsity of defendants’ membership in the I. W. W. is, as is at once obvious, irrelevant to the charge of robbery.”

“It is clear that defendants suffered no prejudice in view of the following instructions given at defendants’ request”

“The evidence was sufficient to justify the verdict.”

Synopsis

The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.

[21]

BURNETT, J.

Defendants were informed against by the district attorney of the county of Humboldt for the crime of robbery committed upon one James McMurray. They were thereupon duly tried and convicted of the crime charged. Defendants moved for a new trial, which motion was denied, and they were thereupon sentenced to imprisonment in the state prison, the judgment fixing an indeterminate sentence. Defendants prosecute this appeal from the judgment and order, alleging for reversal that the court erred in its rulings on the admissibility of evidence, that the district attorney was guilty of misconduct, and that the verdict was against the law and the evidence.

Briefly the facts disclose that soon after James McMurray had met the defendants and convivialized with them, he was invited to their room in a hotel; that upon entering the room defendants locked the door; that after a few drinks defendants, exhibiting certain I. W. W. blanks and documents, requested McMurray to join the I. W. W.; that upon his refusal one of the defendants assailed him with a small table that stood in the room, and then ordered .him to deliver over his money. McMurray was forced to undress and get into bed and his clothes were searched. Upon arising in the morning McMurray found defendants to have left. He then reported the matter to the police, who found upon defendants when arrested money in denominations possessed by the prosecuting witness the night before.

Appellants’ complaint is particularly and solely aimed at the admission of the evidence that defendants in the room requested McMurray to join the I. W. W.; to the admission of certain papers of defendants bearing the I. W. W. title and to the remarks of the district attorney characterizing defendants as members of that organization. The gist of all defendants’ objections is the reference to the I. W. W.

Respondent seeks to support the admission of this evidence as a part of the

res gestae.

Whatever the meaning of that phrase, it is at once apparent that the exclusionary hearsay rule has no application here. The truth or falsity of defendants’ membership in the I. W. W. is, as is at once obvious, irrelevant to the charge of robbery. It is probable, however, and the remarks of the district attorney seem to so indicate, that the prosecution’s theory was that McMurray’s refusal to join the organization. of Industrial Workers furnished a

Related research

As to the question of membership in said organization and • the district attorney’s reference thereto, it is clear that defendants suffered no prejudice in view of the following instructions given at defendants’ request: “You are instructed to disregard all testimony given, other than that pertinent to the crime as alleged in the information; the fact that some evidence has been introduced which would tend to show that the defendants'had some literature of the I. W. W.’s [Industrial Workers of the World] upon them oí in their possession must have no weight in determining the guilt or innocence of the defendants of the crime of robbery, and you aro not permitted to take any evidence which does not pertain to the crime as alleged in the information into consideration in rendering your verdict. You are instructed that the defendants are on trial for the commission of the crime as charged in the information; and in reaching a verdict, you are not to take into consideration any insinuations that may have been made, during the trial, that the defendants are or were members of any disreputable organization, or any organization at all. Neither are you to consider the presence of any literature found in the possession of the defendants as a circumstance tending to prove that they are guilty of the crime as charged in the information.” The jurors were carefully examined by defendants, who exercised many peremptory challenges, to the end, unquestionably, that they might obtain a jury with whose intelligence, common sense, and impartiality they were satisfied. And we must assume that the jury thus carefully selected were men of at least average intelligence and understanding, and fully capable of appreciating and following the instructions given them. We cannot hold otherwise than that they followed the instructions in question and put from their minds any influence that may have been occasioned by reference to the Industrial Workers of the World. So viewing the case it is difficult to see how defendants suffered the prejudice complained of.

AI Brief

Synopsis

BURNETT, J.

More from California Court of Appeal

Related research

AI Brief