Opinion ID: 1381126
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: The Charge of Bribery to Influence Testimony

Text: Count IV of the indictment charged defendant with a violation of Penal Code section 137, which at the time provided in pertinent part: (a) Every person who gives, or offers, or promises to give, to any witness, or person about to be called as a witness, any bribe, upon any understanding or agreement that the testimony of such witness shall be thereby influenced is guilty of a felony. (4) The court relied on the same ground in setting aside count IV as it did in dismissing count III: i.e., because the agreement drafted by defendant did not expressly refer to the withholding or adulteration of Kerhulas' testimony, it could not represent an effort to influence testimony within the terms of section 137, subdivision (a). Because our reasoning with respect to section 136 1/2 applies to section 137 as well, we need not repeat it here. [5] The court was incorrect in requiring a literal reference to testimony as an element of section 137. The grand jury had probable cause to believe that defendant intended to influence Kerhulas' testimony by way of persuading him to withhold it altogether, in exchange for the return of his property.