People v. Searcey
California Supreme Court
APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of San Bernardino County and from an order denying a new trial. Frank F. Oster, Judge. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the CourtGaroutte, J.
The defendant has been convicted of the crime of murder, and by the judgment of the court the extreme penalty of the law has been ordered. Many assignments of error are relied upon by this appeal, and they are all of a somewhat technical character. We will specially notice the more important ones.
*3It is claimed that a challenge to the panel of jurors should have been allowed. The evidence taken upon the hearing of the challenge discloses a very lax performance of duty upon the part of the board of supervisors in selecting the list of trial jurors for the year. The sections of the code…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- People v. WellsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1893
3Cited by20 opinions
- Hughes v. StateTennessee Supreme Court · 1912
- State v. SharpArizona Supreme Court · 1920
- Searle v. Roman Catholic Bishop of SpringfieldMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1909
- People v. Wong HingCalifornia Supreme Court · 1917
- State v. WestonOregon Supreme Court · 1936
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.