People v. Cummings
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 T. Wallace, Judge. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the CourtHenshaw, J.
The indictment charged the obtaining of the property of C. Schnelle by means of false and fraudulent pretenses. Defendant was convicted, and appeals from the judgment and-from the order denying him a new trial.
His first attack is upon the form of the indictment. It will serve no beneficial purpose to set out in full this pleading, which is of great length, and, without doing so, no satisfactory analysis of appellant's objections thereto can be made. It must suffice to say, that after a critical examination we hold the indictment to be sufficient in law to charge the appellant with the…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- People v. GilbertCalifornia Supreme Court · 1880
- People v. ReedCalifornia Supreme Court · 1886
- People v. JochinskyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1895
3Cited by13 opinions
- State v. DeWittSupreme Court of Missouri · 1905
- People v. ThornCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1934
- People v. TilleyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1901
- People v. CummingsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1899
- People v. BowmanCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1914
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.