People v. Haas
California Court of Appeal
The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the CourtJames, J.
Defendant was charged with having obtained the sum of two thousand two hundred dollars of the money of Pearl P. Flynn and her husband, Thomas E. Flynn, by means of false and fraudulent representations and pretenses. A conviction resulted, and from the judgment entered upon the verdict of the jury an appeal has been taken.
But one point is presented for consideration: It is claimed that the information was insufficient to charge a public offense in that it failed to show causal connection between the representations alleged to have been made and the parting with the money by the complainants.…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- People v. McKennaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1889
- People v. KahlerCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1915
- People v. DonaldsonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1886
- People v. HinesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1907
3Cited by7 opinions
- Mathews v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · 1921
- State v. StratfordIdaho Supreme Court · 1934
- People v. WhitesideCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1922
- People v. BlissCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1920
- People v. MooreCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1920
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.