Legal Opinion

People v. Hartman

California Court of Appeal

Decided October 21, 1913No. Crim. No. 215PublishedCited by 18 opinions

The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.

1Opinion of the CourtChipman, P. J.

Defendant was convicted by a jury upon an information charging a violation of section 270 of the Penal Code, the charging portions of said information being as follows:

“The said defendant on or about the 1st day of January, A. D. 1912, at the said Mendocino County, state of California, and before the filing of this information- did then and there, and ever since said date, willfully, unlawfully and feloniously omit without lawful or any excuse to furnish necessary food, clothing, shelter or medical attendance for his child named Dorothy Maxine Hartman; the said, child being then and there…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. People v. LonnenCalifornia Supreme Court · 1903
  2. State v. ThorntonSupreme Court of Missouri · 1911
  3. Matter of McMullinCalifornia Supreme Court · 1913
  4. People v. SchlottCalifornia Supreme Court · 1912
  5. Selfridge v. PaxtonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1905

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

3Cited by18 opinions

  1. Birnbaum v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1939
  2. United States v. LecatoCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1928
  3. Pacific Gold Dredging Co. v. Industrial Accident CommissionCalifornia Supreme Court · 1920
  4. People v. PatelloCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1932
  5. State v. LiliopoulosWashington Supreme Court · 1931

13 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