Van Eman v. Superior Court of San Francisco
California Supreme Court
Hearing in the Supreme Court upon an alternative writ of mandate issued to the Superior Court of the City and County of San Francisco, W. R. Daingerfield, judge, commanding him to settle a bill of exceptions. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the CourtGaroutte, J.
This is a motion upon previous notice for a peremptory mandate to W. R. Daingerfield, judge *644of the superior court of San Francisco, commanding him to settle a bill of exceptions. The petitioner was convicted of a felony in the department of the superior court presided over by the respondent, and upon December 12th duly served and filed his notice of appeal from the judgment and order denying his motion for a new trial.
On January 11, 1895, and within due time, defendant’s counsel presented to respondent, in open court, his proposed bill of exceptions. At that time respondent stated that such…
2Cited by3 opinions
- Page v. CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1898
- Pueblo v. RiveraSupreme Court of Puerto Rico · 1917
- People v. RiveraSupreme Court of Puerto Rico · 1917