State v. Gates

(concurring specially) — I concur in the affirmance. I feel the governing rule is stated in the majority opinion where the opinion points out the testimony with respect to the finding of the exhibits in defendant’s ear and room was for the purpose of corroborating the testimony of the accomplices. The proof of identity of the exhibits as the fruits of the crime was sufficient tO' constitute corroboration for the accomplices’ testimony, even though it might be insufficient to constitute substantive proof of guilt. See People v. Williams, 17 Cal. App. 2d 122, 61 P.2d 813. This is but an…