Legal Opinion

People v. Hertz

California Supreme Court

Decided January 24, 1895No. 21152PublishedCited by 13 opinions

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

1Opinion of the CourtGaroutte, J.

Defendants were informed against by the district attorney for the crime of receiving stolen goods. Defendant Dora Hertz demanded a separate trial, which was duly accorded her, and, being found guilty, was sentenced by the court to serve a. term of four years in the state prison located at San Quentin. This appeal is taken from the final judgment and also from the order of the court denying defendant’s motion for a new trial. It is claimed by the prosecution that defendants bought and received the goods, consisting of pants, coats, and vests, of one McClellan, and that McClellan stole these…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. People v. WilliamsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1860
  2. People v. GordonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1891

3Cited by13 opinions

  1. People v. AmayaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1901
  2. People v. Van EwanCalifornia Supreme Court · 1896
  3. State v. RichmondSupreme Court of Missouri · 1905
  4. State v. PirkeySouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1908
  5. In Re Estate of ClarkCalifornia Supreme Court · 1919

8 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