People v. Barnett

[244]

KOFORD, P. J.

Defendant appeals from a judgment of conviction of the crime of robbery in the first degree. The ground of appeal is the alleged insufficiency of the evidence to warrant the verdict.

The complaining witness, upon reaching his home, was informed of a telephone message requesting him to go to the apartment of Miss Harris, a place where he had frequently called before. The message said that a party was in progress. He went there. Miss Harris was not at home, but was out of town and in Del Monte. He was admitted by a man and was almost immediately attacked by two men who robbed him, bound his hands and feet and threatened to shoot him. One of the robbers remained behind him. He could not be described to the police. The other robber worked in front. The complaining witness’ description of this man to the police and to Miss Harris subsequently led them to declare in the presence of defendant that the description was that of a man known as “Slick,” who was a friend, companion, and “partner” of the defendant. Slick was never found after the robbery. The complaining witness worked himself free from his bindings after the robbers left him lying upon a bed in the apartment. Hé gathered three or four friends and while returning to the scene of the robbery met the defendant on the street in company with a woman companion with whom the defendant lived. He complained to the defendant of his misfortune. Defendant asked him to say nothing on the street, but took him and his friends into his own apartment, which was just across the hall from the apartment of Miss Harris. Defendant there urged him to say nothing for two or three days and that he would give a party and probably find out who it was that committed the robbery. The complaining witness testified that later at the police station the defendant said that “if I would on the oath of my mother swear to God that I would not press charges if he got me my ring,” he would try to get it back if I would go to Oakland with him. There was also testimony that Slick was a friend of defendant’s; that the purpose of going to Oakland to try and get the ring was to try and locate “Slick.” Defendant refused to go to Oakland in company with the police, but offered to go with the complaining witness. When the complaining witness at the

[245]