People v. Raschke
California Supreme Court
Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of the city and county of San Francisco, and from an order refusing a new trial. The facts are stated in the opinion of Mr. Justice McFarland.
1Opinion of the CourtMcFarland, J.
— The attorney-general contends that the bill of exceptions in this case cannot be considered because it was not presented and settled within the time mentioned in the code; but as it was settled, “ we will not inquire into the reasons which may have induced the action of the judge in signing the bill of exceptions after the statutory period, but will presume they were sufficient.” (People v. Sprague, 53 Cal. 422; People v. Lee, 14 Cal. 510.)
The information accused the appellant, jointly with one T. Furlong, of the crime of grand larceny. He was convicted as charged, and appeals from the…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- People v. LeeCalifornia Supreme Court · 1860
- People v. SmithCalifornia Supreme Court · 1863
- People v. SpragueCalifornia Supreme Court · 1879
- Wilson v. StateSupreme Court of Alabama · 1834
3Cited by14 opinions
- People v. RobinsonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1930
- People v. DelbosCalifornia Supreme Court · 1905
- State v. RechnitzMontana Supreme Court · 1898
- People v. TomlinsonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1894
- People v. CorenevskyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1954
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.