Legal Opinion
People v. Hale
California Court of Appeal
Decided November 27, 1923No. Crim. No. 1113PublishedCited by 15 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtSt. Sure, J.
Defendant was convicted by a jury of the crime of robbery. He appeals from the judgment of conviction and the order denying his motion for a new trial.
The points urged for reversal are stated in the opening brief as follows: Insufficiency of identification; error of court in admitting evidence as to identification in city prison; misconduct of district attorney; error in admitting testimony of police officer; error in instructions.
Defendant filed a supplemental brief in which he urges, in addition, that the indeterminate sentence law (Pen. Code, sec. 1168), is unconstitutional and void,…
2Cases cited29 opinions
- Ex Parte GarlandSupreme Court of the United States · 1867
- United States v. KleinSupreme Court of the United States · 1872
- Missouri v. LewisSupreme Court of the United States · 1880
- Moore v. MissouriSupreme Court of the United States · 1895
- In Re LeeCalifornia Supreme Court · 1918
24 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by15 opinions
- Commonwealth Ex Rel. Banks v. CainSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1942
- People v. SlobodionCalifornia Supreme Court · 1948
- People v. BiggsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1937
- State v. MulcareWashington Supreme Court · 1937
- Way v. Superior Court of San Diego Cty.California Court of Appeal · 1977
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.