Court Opinion

ID: 9737361
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-26 19:23:03.410086+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:23:58.288220
License: Public Domain

VALLÉE, J.
I concur in the judgment as to count I. I dissent as to count II. In my opinion the statements of defendants in respect to count II amounted to nothing more than preparation—arranging the means or measures necessary for the commission of the offense. They did not amount to an attempt—a direct movement toward commission of the offense after the preparations have been made. (People v. Franquelin, 109 Cal.App.2d 777, 784 [241 P.2d 651].) “The act, ‘must reach far enough towards the accomplishment of the desired result to amount to the commencement of the consummation. ’ (People v. Miller, 2 Cal.2d 527, 530 [42 P.2d 308, 98 A.L.R. 913].)” (People v. Von Hecht, 133 Cal.App.2d 25, 38 [283 P.2d 764].) The acts of defendants did not amount to direct unequivocal acts which would lead to culmination of the offenses unless interrupted by circumstances independent of any actions on their part. (People v. Buffum, 40 Cal.2d 709, 718 [256 P.2d 317].) I would reverse the judgment as to count II.
Appellants’ petition for a hearing by the Supreme Court was denied March 8, 1961.