Legal Opinion

People v. More

California Court of Appeal

Decided November 13, 1935No. Crim. 1844PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtSturtevant, J.

The defendant was convicted of grand theft. He made a motion for a new trial and he also made a motion in arrest of judgment. The court made orders denying both motions and the defendant appealed from the judgment and from the order denying him a new trial.

He contends that the verdict is contrary to law. That contention is based on the fact that certain jewelry, alleged to have been stolen, was not produced at the trial and that over the objection and exception of the defendant the owner of the jewelry was permitted to testify as to its value. The contention may not be sustained. The owner of…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Burns v. Osborne-Fitzpatrick Finance Co.California Court of Appeal · 1929

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. People v. SelkCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1941
  2. People v. HendersonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1965
  3. People v. ShafferCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1940
  4. People v. Patterson CA1/2California Court of Appeal · 2016
  5. People v. Young CA3California Court of Appeal · 2016

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API