People v. Cota

SHAW, J.

Defendant appeals from a judgment of conviction had upon an information wherein he was charged specifically with the commission of the crime of burglary in the first degree.

The subject of the theft was a quantity of liquor, consisting of wine and whisky contained in bottles and demijohns, taken from the wine cellar, the door of which was locked, which cellar was situated in the basement of a residence owned by Mr. Gould, entry to which was had by the breaking of a window and the lock on the door of the wine cellar.

[1]

One of the essential elements of the crime charged is that it was committed in the night-time, which, in this case, was the time between the hour of sunset at 4:54 P. M. on December 2d, and the hour of sunrise at 6:46 A. M. on December 3d.

Evidence of statements made by the defendant wherein he admitted his participation in the crime, which, he stated, was committed between 10 and 11 o ’clock P. M. on the night of December 2d, was received over defendant’s objection,

[226]

and this ruling is assigned as error. His contention is that the reception thereof was not preceded by proof of the

corpus delicti,

namely, that the crime was committed in the night-time, and without which the evidence was not admissible.

(People

v.

Vertrees,

169 Cal. 404, [146 Pac. 890];

People

v.

Tapia,

131 Cal. 651, [63 Pac. 1001];

Gray

v.

Commonwealth,

101 Pa. St. 380, [47 Am. Rep. 733].) Conceding that it devolved upon the People to show by independent evidence and beyond a reasonable doubt that the specific crime charged was committed