People v. Becker

California Court of Appeal Sep 30, 1930 No. Docket No. 1949.Published

Before: Craig

AI Brief

AI-generated · verify before citing

Holding. The court affirmed the defendant's conviction, finding that the evidence was sufficient to support the verdict, that the trial was fairly conducted, and that alleged errors did not result in a miscarriage of justice.

Issues

Whether the defendant's confession was involuntary and inaccurate.
Whether the testimony of the complaining witness was inherently improbable as a matter of law.
Whether the conduct of the prosecuting attorney and the trial court constituted prejudicial error.
Whether the trial court erred in refusing certain jury instructions requested by the defendant.

Disposition. Affirmed

Quotations verified verbatim against the opinion

“The evidence against the defendant, including evidence of defendant’s confession of guilt, is very strong and convincing.”

“A reading of the entire record leaves the clear impression that, notwithstanding some errors, the trial was fairly conducted, and has not resulted in any miscarriage of justice.”

“The judgment and order denying the motion for a new trial are affirmed.”

[653]

CRAIG (ELLIOT), J.,

pro tem

Appellant Fred J. Becker was convicted on two counts of violation of section 288 of the Penal Code.

Shortly after his arrest appellant signed a confession. This confession was introduced in evidence by the prosecution. Appellant contends that this confession was not freely or voluntarily made and that the statement as signed is not a true recital of his answer to a particular question therein contained. The court fully and properly instructed the jury as to these matters and under the instructions and the evidence in the ease, appellant’s said contention cannot be sustained.

Appellant claims that the testimony of the complaining witness, a boy about eleven years of age, is so filled with discrepancies and contradictory statements made at various times and is so inherently improbable, that the boy is not worthy of belief and that we should say as a matter of law that a conviction cannot rest upon such testimony. It is true that there are some contradictions in the boy’s testimony which go to the weight of his testimony as a whole, but the jurors had him before them and, under the evidence in the case, we cannot disturb their verdict on this ground.

Appellant complains of a large number of matters which he claims when taken in the aggregate resulted in prejudicial error. These include both alleged error of the court in its rulings and many items of alleged misconduct on the part of the prosecuting attorneys. In some instances these assignments of error find support in the record, and the conduct of the deputy district attorney was open to criticism. It should be noted, however, that the remarks of the deputy district attorney, in his final argument, where he referred to the feeling of the board of education, and of other citizens, concerning “the disgrace of this scandal”, and asserted that if there was any doubt in their minds as to the guilt of the defendant, they would have silenced it, related to matters which were not first drawn into the ease by the deputy district attorney. These remarks appear to have been made in reply to an argument made in behalf of the defendant, charging that there was a conspiracy to get rid of the defendant, and that the police department, along

People v. Becker

AI Brief

CRAIG (ELLIOT), J.,

More from California Court of Appeal

Related research

AI Brief