Legal Opinion

People v. Bateman

California Court of Appeal

Decided December 7, 1926No. Docket No. 1339PublishedCited by 12 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

CAMPBELL, J., pro tem.

The defendant Ronald M. Bateman and one Claude Brooks were jointly charged with the crime of robbery and convicted. The defendant Brooks did not appeal. The trial court having denied defendant Bateman’s motion for a new trial, he has taken an appeal to this court from such order denying him a new trial and from the judgment of conviction, and the grounds of such appeal are as follows:

1. It is claimed for defendant that the trial court erred in admitting over his objection a confession which was not freely and voluntarily made; 2. In denying his motion to strike out such…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. People v. FowlerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1918
  2. People v. OliveriaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1899
  3. People v. ThomsonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1905
  4. People v. CliftonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1921
  5. People v. BurnsCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1915

3Cited by12 opinions

  1. People v. ByrdCalifornia Supreme Court · 1954
  2. People v. RauchoCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1935
  3. People v. DyeCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1931
  4. People v. CryderCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1949
  5. People v. Superior Court (Crook)California Court of Appeal · 1978

7 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