Legal Opinion
In Re Petraeus
California Supreme Court
Decided January 17, 1939No. Crim. 4199PublishedCited by 11 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtShenk, J.
The question for determination in this proceeding is whether one who has given self-incriminating testimony as a witness in the defense of another on trial for the crime of gaming, may invoke the immunity provided by section 334 of the Penal Code.
Margaret Petraeus and Westy Petraeus, Jr., were charged by separate informations with violations of section 337a. subdivision 2, of the Penal Code. Margaret Petraeus was tried first. On her trial she called Westy Petraeus, Jr., as her witness. Without claiming the constitutional privilege against self-incrimination, he gave testimony on behalf of…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Johnston v. BakerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1914
- Bannerman v. BoyleCalifornia Supreme Court · 1911
- Golden & Co. v. Justice's CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1914
- In Re CritchlowCalifornia Supreme Court · 1938
- People ex rel. Attorney-General v. ParvinCalifornia Supreme Court · 1888
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by11 opinions
- Mulkey v. ReitmanCalifornia Supreme Court · 1966
- County of Placer v. Aetna Casualty & Surety Co.California Supreme Court · 1958
- In Re BandmannCalifornia Supreme Court · 1958
- State v. SimmsSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1976
- Dieckmann v. Superior Court of Los Angeles CountyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1985
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.