People v. Adams

SEAWELL, J.

Appellant was accused by an information filed against him by the district attorney of the county of Los Angeles, .August 28, 1925, with the crime of having, on August 2, 1925, murdered Annie Adams, who was shown by the evidence to have been his wife. The jury returned a verdict of guilty of- murder of the first degree without exercising its discretion by fixing the punishment at confinement in the state prison for life. Such a verdict in homicide cases, under the law of this state, leaves the court with no discretion in the matter of fixing the punishment, as the law prescribes the penalty, which is death. Such a penalty was, therefore, adjudged and imposed by -the court in the instant case.

The appeal herein is taken from the judgment and the order denying appellant’s motion for a new trial. The incriminatory facts leading up to, attending and following the murder are, briefly, these:

[363]

Appellant and Ms deceased wife had been living separate and apart for several months prior to Sunday, August 2, 1925. On the day last named the deceased left her apartment at 1234 East Twenty-first Street in the city of Los Angeles, and was visiting her husband’s sister and husband, Mrs. Julia and Major T. Harris, who resided at 1129 East Twelfth Street. Other friends were also visiting the Harris family on this day. During the afternoon appellant entered the Harris home, where a small company of friends were gathered, but he had little to say and soon departed. He returned again in the early evening between 6 and 7 o’clock. He seemed to be in a belligerent frame of mind and, after entering the room where Ms sister (Mrs. Harris) and her husband, his deceased wife, and others were gathered, called his wife out of the room and spoke aside with her for a few moments. The wife, who seemed to fear him, was soon seen backing into the room where the others were gathered, calling upon Major T. Harris “to make Syd behave.” Mr. Harris, sensing the situation, remonstrated with appellant, who kept Ms hand suspiciously at Ms hip pocket. He finally grappled Mm and a struggle ensued during which Harris took occasion to satisfy himself that appellant was armed with a revolver. He succeeded in ejecting him from Ms home and as appellant was leaving he exhibited a revolver in a threatening manner. Thereafter Ms wife went to her apartment at 1234 East Twenty-first Street and, at about 11 o’clock P. M., appellant called her to the telephone. A brief conversation followed. The wife immediately called up the police department and two officers afterward presented themselves at her apartment. They remained but a short time and very soon after they departed appellant appeared. He entered the house and, passing the door which led into the bedroom which Mrs. Cohen, thee landlady, was occupying, spoke to her. Mrs. Cohen, who was in bed, heard voices issuing from the adjoining room occupied by appellant’s wife immediately after he passed her door, but she was not able to hear what was said. Within a short time after .appellant entered his wife’s apartment Mrs. Cohen heard the sound of two pistol shots and heard Mrs. Adams scream twice. She then sprang from her bed and in going into .Mrs. Adams’ room she met her in a small narrow hall that connected the two rooms.