Legal Opinion
People v. Prather
California Supreme Court
Decided May 18, 1898No. Crim. No. 360PublishedCited by 18 opinions
APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Yolo County and from an order denying a new trial. E. C. Hart, Judge. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the Court
SEARLS, C.
This is an appeal by the defendant from a judgment of conviction of grand larceny and from an order denying his motion for a new trial. The defendant was prosecuted by information hied by the district attorney in the .county of Yolo, on the 14th of April, 1897. The following excerpt from the information will serve to illustrate the objections urged against its sufficiency:
“The said Frank Prather did, on or about the eighth day of March, 1897, in the county of Yolo, state of California, then and there being, willfully, unlawfully, and feloniously steal, take, and drive away certain…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- People v. HickmanCalifornia Supreme Court · 1896
- People v. BentleyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1888
- People v. SmithCalifornia Supreme Court · 1896
- People v. Leong QuongCalifornia Supreme Court · 1882
- State v. MarksUtah Supreme Court · 1898
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by18 opinions
- People v. BurkeCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1912
- People v. DowellCalifornia Supreme Court · 1928
- People v. SmithCalifornia Supreme Court · 1940
- Fenner v. CommonwealthSupreme Court of Virginia · 1929
- State v. HenrySouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1973
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.