Case Name: THE PEOPLE, Respondent, v. JOE LAYDEN, Appellant
Court: District Court of Appeal of the State of California
Jurisdiction: California
Decision Date: 1915-11-04
Citations: 28 Cal. App. 805
Docket Number: Crim. No. 425
Parties: THE PEOPLE, Respondent, v. JOE LAYDEN, Appellant.
Judges: 
Reporter: California Appellate Reports
Volume: 28
Pages: 805–805

Head Matter:
[Crim. No. 425.
Second Appellate District.
November 4, 1915.]
THE PEOPLE, Respondent, v. JOE LAYDEN, Appellant.
Criminal Law—Burglary—Evidence—Admissions.—In this prosecution for burglary the judgment and order are affirmed on the authority of People v. Morrell, (Crim. No. 424), ante, p. 729.
APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Imperial County and from an order denying a new trial. Franklin J. Cole, Judge.
The facts are similar to those stated in People v. Morrell, ante, p. 729, [153 Pac. 977], stated in the opinion of the court.
J. A. Berry, for Appellant.
U. S. Webb, Attorney-General, and Robert M. Clarke, Deputy Attorney-General, for Respondent.

Opinion:
THE COURT.
Defendant, with two others, Jack Clark and Jack Morrell, was charged with the crime of burglary. Upon trial therefor, separate from his codefendants, he was convicted, and this appeal is prosecuted from the judgment of imprisonment imposed.
An examination of the record shows the facts of the case to be substantially the same as those presented in the case of People v. Morrell, (Crim. No. 424), ante, p. 729, [153 Pac. 977], an opinion in which was this day filed, holding the alleged errors disclosed by the record to be without merit and affirming the judgment.
The reasons there assigned for the decision sustaining the rulings of the trial court are equally potent here, and upon the authority of the opinion in that case, the judgment and the order denying defendant's motion for a new trial are affirmed.