Peolple v. Warren
California Supreme Court
APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of San Luis Obispo County and from an order denying a new trial. E. P. Hnangst, Judge. The description 'of the property stolen was as stated in the first syllabus. Further facts are stated in the opinion.
1Opinion of the Court
COOPER, C.
Defendant was jointly indicted with one J. A. Warren, Jr., for grand larceny, and convicted. This appeal is from the judgment and an order denying a new trial. It is conceded that the evidence is sufficient to sustain the verdict.
Defendant contends that the indictment did not describe the property alleged to have been stolen with sufficient certainty. The description has been held sufficient in People v. Warren, post, p. 683, and upon the authority of that case the point is settled. Error is assigned in the refusal of the court to continue the case, during the trial, for the purpose…
2Cited by22 opinions
- People v. CoxCalifornia Supreme Court · 2003
- George Grant v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1961
- People v. GonzalesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1968
- People v. DemesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1963
- People v. ButlerCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1975
17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.