People v. Burdette
The PEOPLE, Respondent, v. ALBERT BURDETTE Et Al., Appellants
- Proceeding
- appeal from a judgment
- Trial court
- Superior Court of Los Angeles County
- Trial judge
- B. Rey Schauer
- Outcome
- affirmed — Affirmed.
- Area
- criminal
- Panel
- Frederick W. Houser (author)
Analysis
No analysis yet. When one exists it is a model's reading of this opinion — the rulings it reviewed, whether it agrees with the court, and the authorities it checked — shown beside the court's own disposition, never in place of it. How analyses are made.
Opinion — Houser
HOUSER, J.
In the instant appeal it appears that each of the defendants was convicted of the crime of robbery. From the ensuing judgment, as well as from the order by which their motion for a new trial was denied, the defendants have appealed to this court.
It also appears that in a separate action, one Lemons and each of the defendants herein was convicted of the offense of driving an automobile without the consent of the owner so to do, etc.; and in that action all the defendants also appealed from the judgment rendered against them. By stipulation of the several parties to the respective appeals, but one brief was filed in the two appeals—which brief dealt with the single contention on the part of all the appellants “that the verdict of the jury is contrary to the evidence”. However, it is conceded that the evidence adduced by the prosecution on the trial of the action was sufficient to sustain the verdict and the judgment.
In the determination of the appeal wherein all the defendants were appellants, the reasons assigned by this court are applicable to the instant appeal. (See ante, p. 246 [19 Pac. (2d) 1000].)
It is ordered that the judgment and the order by which the motion for a new trial was denied be and they are affirmed.
Conrey, P. J., and York, J., concurred.
Cites, in this corpus
- People v. Burdette Docket No. 2289. · 1933-03-04