People v. Eastman
California Supreme Court
Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of Mendocino County, and from an order denying a new trial. The facts are stated in the opinion.
1Opinion of the Court
Foote, C.
The defendant was convicted of the larceny of a mare. From the judgment, and an order denying him a new trial, this appeal is taken.
The evidence went to show that the defendant was originally the owner of the mare, and that she was in pledge to McClure, the prosecuting witness, for a debt which the defendant owed him; that' the defendant had worked for McClure for two months, and claimed wages for his services; that under this state of facts, McClure declining to advance him some money, the defendant in the daytime, and without any concealment, took the mare away from McClure’s farm,…
2Cited by19 opinions
- Butts v. CommonwealthSupreme Court of Virginia · 1926
- People v. ButlerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1967
- People v. HillhouseMichigan Supreme Court · 1890
- People v. SheasbeyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1927
- People v. PhotoCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1941
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.