Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

30 Cal. App. 762

159 P 457

People v. Day

California Court of Appeal

Decided June 15, 1916

California Court of Appeal · decided 1916-06-15

<p>Criminal Law — Burglary—Receiving Stolen Goods — Election of Prosecution. — In a criminal prosecution, even if the evidence warranted a charge of burglary upon the theory that the defendant was an accessory thereto, where it also shows that the defendant subsequently received the fruits of the burglary from the actual perpetrator thereof, knowing them to be stolen, as defendant was guilty of receiving stolen goods, he cannot complain that the people elected to charge him with the latter offense rather than with the former.</p>

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1916-06-15

How this case has been cited

Cited by 7 later decisions — most recently November 1975

7 state decisions

201916192019301940195019601970decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

THE COURT.

¶1We find from a review of the record that the evidence in this case sufficiently supports the verdict; that even if the evidence warranted and would have supported a charge of burglary upon the theory that the defendant was an accessory thereto, nevertheless it also shows that the de*763fendant subsequently received the fruits of the burglary from the actual perpetrator thereof knowing them to be stolen; that as a consequence he was guilty of receiving stolen goods; that therefore he cannot be heard to complain that the people elected to charge him with the latter offense rather than with the former. We further find that the testimony of the admitted accomplice of the defendant in the commission of the crime charged was amply corroborated by other and independent evidence, and that there was no error in the charge of the court or in its refusal to give certain instructions requested upon behalf of the defendant.

¶2Upon these grounds the judgment and order appealed from are affirmed.

/30/calapp/762 · .json · Public domain