People v. Hovermale
California Court of Appeal
1Opinion of the Court
HAHN, J., pro tem.
James Hovermale and Roy Smith were charged jointly with the crime of robbery by an indictment returned by the grand jury of Los Angeles County. The prosecution proceeded with the trial against Hovermale in the absence of Smith, who at that time had not been apprehended. Prom the judgment of the court upon a verdict of guilty, and the order denying his motion for a new trial, defendant Hovermale prosecutes this appeal.
Prom the record it appears that on the evening of November 7, 1923, between the hours of 7:40 and 8:00, a Pasadena Short Line ear • of the Pacific Electric…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Hirshfeld v. DanaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1924
- People v. WardripCalifornia Supreme Court · 1903
- People v. JaillesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1905
- People v. McNamaraCalifornia Supreme Court · 1892
- People v. RuizCalifornia Supreme Court · 1904
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- People v. WhiteCalifornia Supreme Court · 1958
- People v. KaneCalifornia Supreme Court · 1946
- People v. MayesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1947
- People v. SmithCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1925
- People v. BrooksCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1926