Opinion
Docket No. 4832.
October 30, 1952.
APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County and from an order denying a new trial. Charles W. Fricke, Judge. Affirmed.
Prosecution for bookmaking. Judgment of conviction affirmed.
Horace Appel for Appellant.
Edmund G. Brown, Attorney General, and Michael J. Clemens, Deputy Attorney General, for Respondent.
This is an appeal from the judgment and order denying a motion for a new trial. [1] Defendant was charged by information with the violation of section 337(a) of the Penal Code, which declares the law relating to "bookmaking" in that defendant did wilfully, etc., "record and register a bet and bets . . . upon the result . . ." etc., following the language of the statute.
A jury was duly waived and following a trial by the court defendant was adjudged guilty.
It is contended on appeal that "The evidence is insufficient to predicate the finding and decision of the court."
It would serve no useful purpose to recite the details. The evidence was typical of such offenses. Certain papers and notes were found on defendant which were identified by the officer, who qualified as an expert, as "records, or registers," on certain horse races, horses and bets.
A review of the record discloses that the evidence is sufficient to support the judgment.
The judgment and order are affirmed.
Drapeau, J., concurred.
I concur. I find no similarity between the factual situation presented in the cases of People v. Simon, 66 Cal.App.2d 860 [ 153 P.2d 420] and People v. King, 111 Cal.App.2d 201 [ 244 P.2d 20], and the case at bar. In view of the papers, notes and documents found on the appellant, his failure to offer any defense whatsoever or to take the witness stand to explain or deny under oath the web of evidence woven about him was itself a potent fact for consideration by the trial judge and affords ample support for the judgment rendered, holding that defendant aided and abetted or advised and encouraged his wife in the commission of the offense charged.