Legal Opinion
People v. Rucker
California Court of Appeal
Decided March 1, 1932No. Docket No. 2161PublishedCited by 12 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
THOMPSON (IRA F.), J.
The defendant was charged with a violation of the Narcotic and Drug Act (see Deering’s Supp. to Codes & Gen. Laws, 1929, p. 3542), and also with a prior conviction of burglary. He admitted the prior conviction, but entered a plea of not guilty to the charge of violating the Narcotic and Drug Act. He was found guilty and sentenced. He appeals from the judgment and order denying his motion for a new trial.
Four asserted reasons why we should order a reversal are advanced. They are as follows: 1. That appellant was not brought to trial within the sixty-day period fixed by…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Ray v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1929
- People v. DuffyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1930
- People v. HarrisCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1926
3Cited by12 opinions
- People v. LindseyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1949
- State v. DennisSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1964
- People v. LeeCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1935
- People v. SchwartzCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1952
- People v. GrijalvaCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1941
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.