People v. Jackson

I dissent. I cannot conclude that the record contains sufficient substantial evidence to uphold the conviction on count 4—the count involving the Emerson prescription: there simply was no evidence that the prescription was other than genuine. (Cf., People v. Kurland (1973) 33 Cal.App.3d 197, 200-201 [108 Cal.Rptr. 874, 117 Cal.Rptr. 216].)

The majority bases its conclusion that the evidence was sufficient on three bits of circumstantial evidence: (1) the discovery in Jackson’s car of *564“stolen” items apparently belonging to an S. Y. Emerson; (2) the extrajudicial admissions of Hattaway; and (3)…