Legal Opinion

People v. Hen Chin

California Court of Appeal

Decided November 2, 1956No. Crim. 3219PublishedCited by 15 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

WOOD (Fred B.), J.

An officer experienced in the enforcement of the narcotics laws 1 knew defendant Rudy Chin and knew Chin to be a user of narcotics. 2 He had an agent working under him who was buying narcotics from one McNamara and reported that McNamara twice took the agent to the vicinity of a certain hotel and told the agent that McNamara’s connection was a Chinese by the name of Rudy. About two hours before going to that hotel, the officer interviewed a Chinese informant (one who had given reliable information on previous occasions and who was known to the officer as an associate of Rudy…

2Cases cited12 opinions

  1. People v. MartinCalifornia Supreme Court · 1955
  2. People v. MaddoxCalifornia Supreme Court · 1956
  3. Willson v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1956
  4. People v. BoylesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1955
  5. People v. DenneCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1956

7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by15 opinions

  1. People v. WillardCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1965
  2. People v. RuizCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1956
  3. People v. PooleCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1959
  4. People v. CarswellCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1957
  5. People v. GarnerCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1965

10 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