People v. Parks

YORK, P. J.— Defendants were jointly accused in an information containing two counts (1) of a violation of subdivision 2, section 337a, Penal Code, in that on August 21, 1943, they did unlawfully keep and occupy a room in a building located at 348% North Gardner, in the county of Los Angeles, with papers, apparatus, device and paraphernalia, for the purpose of recording and registering bets on horse races; and (2) of a violation of subdivision 4, section 337a. Penal Code, in that on the same day they feloniously recorded and registered bets on horse races.

A jury trial being duly waived and the People’s case having been submitted upon the transcript of the preliminary examination, the court found “each defendant ‘Guilty’ as [549]charged in Count 1 of the information, and ‘Not Guilty’ as charged in Count 2.” Defendant Parks was granted probation and the application for probation of defendant Marino was denied.

From the judgment of conviction which was thereafter entered against him, defendant Marino has taken this appeal, contending that the evidence is legally insufficient to support the judgment.

The first witness was Officer Fisk of the Los Angeles Police Department, attached to Administrative Vice Division, who, accompanied by Officer Smith, arrested the defendants at 348% North Gardner Street at approximately 2:53 p. m. on August 21, 1943. This witness testified that the premises in question were improved with a four-flat building, two flats upstairs and two flats down; that he knocked on the door and saw defendant Parks in the hall; that he called to her to open the door stating that he was a police officer, whereupon defendant Parks turned and went towards the front of the house; that the witness then broke the glass window and crawled into the kitchen; that on the kitchen table and on the floor he found certain papers (Exhibit A) and on the kitchen table he found two California Turf Digests dated August 21, 1943 (Exhibits B and C). That there were two telephones in the apartment which consisted of a bedroom in the back, a bathroom, a kitchen, a living room and a dining room; that when he went from the kitchen into the living room he saw a man’s hat on the top of the sofa and a man’s coat on the back of a dining room chair, also a woman’s suit coat “over the man’s coat on the same chair. After searching the premises, I went to the apartment next door—the other flat upstairs” which was number 346%, on the south side of the same building; that the screen door at the back of 346% was open and “I walked through this door and I came -the front part of the house, and I saw both of the defendants seated, and as they looked in my direction both started to run, and I took both of them into custody and took them back to 348% and called Officer Smith, who came up into the apartment.” That one of the telephones was connected but the cord of the other had been pulled from the wall; that he reinstated that cord and then asked appellant Marino if there were any more papers such as People’s Exhibit A, and he replied that “those were all the papers”; that upon fur