Case Name: THE PEOPLE, Respondent, v. RAYMOND W. McKEE, Appellant
Court: Supreme Court of California
Jurisdiction: California
Decision Date: 1934-01-31
Citations: 220 Cal. 778
Docket Number: Crim. No. 3669
Parties: THE PEOPLE, Respondent, v. RAYMOND W. McKEE, Appellant.
Judges: 
Reporter: California Reports
Volume: 220
Pages: 778–779

Head Matter:
[Crim. No. 3669.
In Bank.
January 31, 1934.]
THE PEOPLE, Respondent, v. RAYMOND W. McKEE, Appellant.
R. W. McKee, in pro. per., Monroe B. Kulberg, Clare Woolwine and Bourke Jones, for Appellant.
U. S. Webb, Attorney-General, John S. Richer and Prank Richards, Deputies Attorney-General, Buron Pitts, District Attorney, and Jesse Frampton and Tracy Chatfield Becker, Deputies District Attorney, for Respondent.

Opinion:
THE COURT.
A hearing was granted in this case after decision by the District Court of Appeal, Second Appellate District, Division Two. For the reasons expressed by us in People v. Talbot et al., Crim. No. 3668 (ante, p. 3 [28 Pac. (2d) 1057]), we adopt the opinion of Mr. Justice pro tern. Archbald of said District Court of Appeal as the opinion of this court. It reads as follows:
"Defendant was charged with grand theft in an indictment containing eighty-nine counts. He was tried jointly with J. A. Talbot and C. M. Puller before the court sitting without a jury, and at the conclusion thereof it was stipulated that the evidence in such case should be the evidence herein as to counts XVII, XIX and XX, all other counts being ordered off calendar, also by stipulation. The court found him guilty as to such counts, and from the judgments entered thereon and the orders denying his motions for a new trial defendant has appealed.
"Count XVII involves the withdrawal of $1,000 from the funds of the Richfield Oil Company of California on September 28, 1929, and their use by appellant for his own personal purposes, count XIX a similar withdrawal and use of the sum of $2,000 on October 4, 1929, and count XX the same as to $2,000 on October 22, 1929, the withdrawals, personal use and the fact that such sums were technically or constructively in appellant's possession being admitted by him.
" The contentions of appellant here are raised by the briefs filed in the appeal of McKee in Crim. No. 3668 (ante, p. 3 [28 Pac. (2d) 1057]), files of this court, and such contentions are discussed and decided in the opinion this day filed therein."
Judgments and orders affirmed.
Rehearing denied.