People v. Wong Ah You
California Supreme Court
Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of the city and county of San Francisco, and from an order refusing a new trial. The defendant was convicted of the crime of grand larceny in having stolen a sum of money belonging to the complaining witness, in whose house he was employed as a servant. The further facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the CourtSharpstein, J.
Beyond the fact that the defendant having access to the house and to the rooms in which the missing money was kept, the only circumstance which militates in any degree against him is his statement that when he returned from Sunday-school he found the door through which he entered the house open, while a witness who was in the house at the time testifies that the defendant unlocked the door before entering. There is no evidence that the stolen property or any portion of it was ever in the possession of the defendant, or that he knew where it was kept. The evidence is that none of it has ever…
2Cited by24 opinions
- People v. MacDonaldCalifornia Supreme Court · 1914
- Oxford Consumer Discount Co. v. StefanelliSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1970
- People v. JolletCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1943
- (PS) George v. SohalDistrict Court, E.D. California · 2022
- Adams v. Jefferson Union High School DistrictDistrict Court, N.D. California · 2019
19 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.