People v. Van Ewan
California Supreme Court
Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of the City and County of San Francisco, and from an order denying a new trial. William R. Baingekpield, Judge. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the CourtMcFarland, J.
The defendant was charged with embezzling one hundred dollars, the property of one J. Poppa, and was convicted. He appeals from the judgment and from an order denying his motion for a new trial.
Although the case must be reversed for reasons hereinafter given, a few of the points made by appellant which are not tenable must be noticed, because they may arise upon another trial.
1. It is contended that the money alleged to have been embezzled was not the property of Poppa, but was the property of the Savage Commercial Company. The appellant had for several years been the agent of said company,…
2Cases cited16 opinions
- People v. CroninCalifornia Supreme Court · 1867
- McMinn v. WhelanCalifornia Supreme Court · 1865
- People v. TraversCalifornia Supreme Court · 1891
- People v. McNamaraCalifornia Supreme Court · 1892
- People v. Fong ChingCalifornia Supreme Court · 1889
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by30 opinions
- People v. MaughsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1906
- People v. AmayaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1901
- People v. RyanCalifornia Supreme Court · 1907
- State v. BesterSupreme Court of Iowa · 1969
- People v. WellsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1904
25 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.