People v. Lon Yeck
California Supreme Court
APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of the City and County of San Francisco and from an order denying a new-trial. Frank H. Dunne, Judge. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the CourtGaroutte, J.
The defendants have been convicted of robbery, and appeal from the judgment and order denying their motion for a new trial. The points relied upon for reversal of the judgment are few and of little importance.
Complaint is made that the following instruction was erroneously given: “A witness whose testimony is false in one part is to be distrusted in other parts.” This enunciation of the law is framed substantially in the language of the statute, and has been directly approved in People v. Treadwell, 69 Cal. 226, and People v. Ah Sing, 95 Cal. 656. However, in giving instructions to the jury…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- People v. TreadwellCalifornia Supreme Court · 1886
- People v. PlylerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1898
- People v. Ah SingCalifornia Supreme Court · 1892
3Cited by3 opinions
- People v. DobkinCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1946
- People v. HolmesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1899
- People v. GroenigCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1922