Legal Opinion

People v. Flood

California Supreme Court

Decided May 1, 1894No. 21057PublishedCited by 16 opinions

Appeal from an order of the City and County of San Francisco granting a new trial. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.

1Opinion of the CourtHarrison, J.

The defendant was convicted of the crime of embezzlement, and, before judgment was pronounced upon the verdict, moved for a new trial upon *331several grounds, one of which was that the verdict was contrary to the evidence. This motion was argued before the court and taken under advisement, and thereafter, on the 7th of July, 1893, the court made the following order:

“In this cause on this day the defendant, his counsel being present in court, counsel for defendant having heretofore presented a motion for a new trial, and the same having been submitted to the court for consideration and decision,…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Kauffman v. MaierCalifornia Supreme Court · 1892
  2. People v. Lum YitCalifornia Supreme Court · 1890
  3. People v. AshnauerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1873
  4. People v. BakerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1870
  5. People v. HotzCalifornia Supreme Court · 1887

3Cited by16 opinions

  1. People v. FerlinCalifornia Supreme Court · 1928
  2. People v. MegladderyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1940
  3. People v. TapiaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1901
  4. Estate of BainbridgeCalifornia Supreme Court · 1915
  5. Koyer v. McComberCalifornia Supreme Court · 1938

11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API