People v. Arrangoiz
California Court of Appeal
1Opinion of the CourtMcCOMB, J.
Defendant was convicted after trial by jury of violation of section 288 of the Penal Code. This appeal is from the judgment and order denying his motion for a new trial. There is also a purported appeal from the sentence.
Viewing the evidence most favorable to the respondent, the essential facts are:
In June, 1937, defendant took a female child of the age of seven years to his room. He took off her clothing and placed his hand on her private parts.
Defendant relies for reversal of the judgment on the following propositions:
First: The evidence is insufficient to sustain the judgment.
Second: The…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Leavens v. Pinkham & McKevittCalifornia Supreme Court · 1912
- People v. BoggessCalifornia Supreme Court · 1924
- Thatch v. LivingstonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1936
- People v. GrovesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1935
- People v. RichardsonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1937
3Cited by14 opinions
- People v. TorresCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1950
- People v. DarcyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1943
- People v. GoffCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1950
- People v. AvanziCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1938
- People v. HortonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1961
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.