Legal Opinion

People v. Hamil

California Court of Appeal

Decided July 17, 1925No. Docket No. 1252PublishedCited by 9 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

PRESTON, J., pro tem.

The defendant was indicted by the grand jury of the city and county of San Francisco for unlawfully failing, without lawful excuse, to furnish necessary food, clothing, etc., for an illegitimate minor child, and thereby violating the provisions of section 270 of the Penal Code, as amended in 1923 (Stats. 1923, p. 592). To this indictment defendant entered a plea of not guilty and went to trial before a jury, and the jury found him guilty. Defendant made a motion for a new trial and a motion in arrest of judgment, both of which were denied, and the court pronounced…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. People v. LewisCalifornia Supreme Court · 1899
  2. People v. StanleyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1917
  3. People v. SwiggyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1924
  4. People v. MurphyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1870
  5. People v. McPhersonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1907

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

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. People v. McIlvainCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1942
  2. State v. SimsSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1952
  3. People v. BarnesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1966
  4. People v. GossCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1992
  5. Moreno v. Superior CourtCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1966

4 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