People v. Clark
California Supreme Court
The facts are stated in the opinion.
1Opinion of the Court
GRAY, C.
Defendant was convicted of grand larceny, and appeals from the judgment and from an order denying him a new trial.
1. He complains of the refusal of the court to give one of his requested instructions, commencing as follows: “In order to convict the defendant on circumstantial evidence it is necessary,” etc. This instruction assumes that a conviction, if had, must necessarily be based on circumstantial evidence. At the same time appellant concedes in his brief that there was direct evidence that defendant committed the crime charged, in the testimony of the complaining witness, Caler.…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- People v. MuhlnerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1896
- People v. ChurchCalifornia Supreme Court · 1897
- People v. LopezCalifornia Supreme Court · 1901
- People v. LonnenCalifornia Supreme Court · 1903
- People v. BurnsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1898
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- People v. JonesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1943
- People v. RothCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1964
- People v. CooperCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1968
- People v. NunnCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1944
- People v. BrownCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1906
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.