Legal Opinion

People v. Devine

California Supreme Court

Decided July 8, 1892No. 20911PublishedCited by 41 opinions

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

1Opinion of the CourtSharpstein, J.

“ Larceny is the felonious stealing, *228taking, carrying, leading, or driving away the personal property of another.” (Pen. Code, sec. 484.) In this case the evidence is sufficient to justify a jury in finding that appellant took and carried away the property of another; but insufficient to justify the finding that appellant feloniously stole the same. Therefore the evidence is insufficient to justify the verdict of guilty of larceny against the defendant, and for that reason he is entitled to a new trial. The evidence shows that the appellant and Robert Doherty occupy adjoining tracts of land,…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. People v. ChuckCalifornia Supreme Court · 1889
  2. McCourt v. . PeopleNew York Court of Appeals · 1876
  3. People v. BowersCalifornia Supreme Court · 1889
  4. People v. BuelnaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1889
  5. People v. Cheong Foon ArkCalifornia Supreme Court · 1882

3Cited by41 opinions

  1. People v. MaughsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1906
  2. People v. TalleCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1952
  3. People v. ButlerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1967
  4. People v. WellsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1893
  5. People v. RoeCalifornia Supreme Court · 1922

36 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