People v. Hume
California Court of Appeal
1Dissent
WOOD (Parker), J.
I dissent. The case was tried without a jury. The trial judge had the benefit of personal observation of the witnesses. He stated that he believed the prosecutrix. The rule is that if the circumstances reasonably justify the findings of the trier of facts, the opinion of the .reviewing court that those circumstances also might be reconciled reasonably with the innocence of the defendant will *272not warrant interference with the determination of the trier of the facts. (People v. Newland, (1940) 15 Cal.2d 678, 681 [104 P.2d 778].)
Appellant’s only contention on appeal is that the…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- People v. NewlandCalifornia Supreme Court · 1940
- Davey v. Southern Pacific Co.California Supreme Court · 1897
- People v. NorringtonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1921
- People v. BurnetteCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1940
- People v. BidlemanCalifornia Supreme Court · 1894
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.