Legal Opinion

People v. Kraker

California Supreme Court

Decided June 4, 1887No. 20285PublishedCited by 17 opinions

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 facts are stated in the opinion of the court.

1Opinion of the CourtPaterson, J.

Defendant was convicted of the crime of receiving stolen goods knowing them to have been stolen.

At the trial, one H. G. Matthewson, who was charged in the information with the stealing of the goods, was a witness against the defendant,—evidently the principal witness.

At the conclusion of the testimony and argument, the defendant asked the court to instruct the jury substantially in the language of section 1111 of the Penal Code, which reads as follows:—

“ A conviction cannot be had on the testimony of an accomplice, unless he is corroborated by other evidence, which in itself, and without the…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Cross v. PeopleIllinois Supreme Court · 1868
  2. People v. LevisonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1860
  3. State v. SchlagelSupreme Court of Iowa · 1865
  4. Commonwealth v. FordMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1873

3Cited by17 opinions

  1. People v. CoffeyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1911
  2. People v. GriffinCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1950
  3. People v. ShawCalifornia Supreme Court · 1941
  4. People v. AllisonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1927
  5. People v. CreeganCalifornia Supreme Court · 1898

12 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