People v. Church
Before: Garoutte
Synopsis
Criminal Law—Robbery — Grand Larceny—Presence or Absence op Force or Fear — Question for Jury — Instructions—Erroneous Charge Eliminating Larceny.—In every trial upon a charge of robbery in taking property from the person of another with force or fear, the offense of grand larceny is included, and where the evidence justifies it, the court should of its own motion instruct the jury to that effect, and that their verdict may be framed along those lines; and where the evidence is such as to make it a question of fact for the jury to determine whether there was the presence or absence of force or fear in the taking, it is error demanding a reversal of a judgment of conviction of robbery to give an instruction that has the effect of eliminaing any question of larceny from the case.
Id.—Snatching Property from Hand or Vest.—Grabbing or snatching property from the hand of another person is grand larceny, and not robbery; and where a watch and chain is hurriedly snatched from the vest of another, it is a question for the jury whether the taking was robbery or grand larceny, according as they find the presence or absence of force and fear.
Garoutte, J. Defendant was charged with the crime of robbery, alleged to have been committed by taking from the person of one Smith a certain gold watch of the value of ninety dollars, one gold chain of the value of thirty dollars, and one gold knife of the value of five dollars. It is further charged that the property belonged to Smith, and that force and intimidation were used in the taking. He was convicted, and now prosecutes this appeal.
The offense here charged is claimed to have been committed in a saloon, in the presence of various habitues of that resort, and all the evidence of the prosecution bearing upon the actual taking of the property may be summed up as follows: One witness testified: Saw some difficulty between defendant and Mr. Smith. Saw defendant grab a- watch from Mr. Smith’s vest and run through the door with it. I did not notice whether the chain was gold or silver. It was a kind of reddish or yellow color. I saw a watch attached to it.” Cross-examination: “At the time the watch was taken we were standing around the bar. The first I saw of Church [defendant] after we were standing up at the bar was when he grabbed for the chain. I saw him make a motion toward it. Mr. Church [defendant] was standing with his back toward Mr. Smith, and in conversation at the bar. I could see the chain, and saw the defendant take hold of it and pull it. I don’t know whether the chain broke or not. I never saw any part of it afterward. The reason I know the watch was attached to it was because I saw it about ten minutes before. I did not see him take the watch from his pocket, but I saw the watch hanging to the chain about ten minutes before. I saw him grab for the chain, and take it. It was done so quick that I could not swear that I saw the watch being taken.” Another witness said: “ I saw some trouble between Smith and defendant Church. I was standing alongside the bar, just behind the defendant, about the time the affair occurred, and I saw—well, I could not say he made a grab, I did not see him grab the watch, [302]but I saw Harry Church make a grab at the watch and run out the door. I did not see him grab the watch, but I saw him make a grab and run out the door shortly afterward. I did not notice anything remarkable before the alleged grab.” Another witness said: “I saw the difficulty between Smith and the defendant. I was at the end of the bar nearest the door, and Church called Smith aside to where I was standing, and not wishing to overhear the conversation I moved to the other end of the bar, and after a few minutes elapsed, I saw Smith start back, and his hat fell off, and Church made a break to the door. That is all I saw of it, or know about it. He ran out of the door.”
More from California Supreme Court
- People v. Wende (1979)
- People v. Watson (1956)
- People v. Superior Court (Romero) (1996)
- People v. Kelly (2006)
- Auto Equity Sales, Inc. v. Superior Court (1962)
- Aguilar v. Atlantic Richfield Co. (2001)
- People v. Lewis (2021)
- In Re Estrada (1965)
- Denham v. Superior Court (1970)
- People v. Marsden (1970)