Legal Opinion

People v. Rosenberg

California Court of Appeal

Decided December 16, 1933No. Docket No. 258PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtBarnard, P. J.

The defendant was convicted of the crime of burglary and this appeal is from an order granting his motion for a new trial.

The first point raised is that the court abused its discretion in making the order complained of. It is argued that while the motion was made on all of the statutory grounds set forth in section 1181 of the Penal Code, it referred specifically only to the ground of newly discovered evidence; that counsel for respondent presented that ground alone in his argument; that the court was therefore limited to that ground in considering the motion; and that the order must be…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. People v. CanfieldCalifornia Supreme Court · 1916
  2. People v. KnutteCalifornia Supreme Court · 1896
  3. People v. Lum YitCalifornia Supreme Court · 1890
  4. People v. WinnerCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1916
  5. People v. DewarCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1920

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

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. People v. McEntyreCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1938
  2. People v. MattmuellerCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1938
  3. People v. CessenaCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1937
  4. State v. SorensonNevada Supreme Court · 1957

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API