People v. Hellum
California Court of Appeal
1Opinion of the Court
STONE, J. *
Appellant and a eodefendant were charged with burglary. At their preliminary hearing defense counsel objected to the introduction of most of the pertinent evidence, urging the exclusionary rule of the Calían ease, the hearsay evidence rule, and the unreliability of an informer. Had the objections been sustained and the evidence excluded, there would have been insufficient evidence to hold appellant and his codefendant to answer.
The questions presented by the objections were novel in some respects, which prompted the magistrate to request points and authorities from the district…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- People v. ElliotCalifornia Supreme Court · 1960
- People v. NapthalyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1895
- People v. McCallaCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1923
- People v. RodrigoCalifornia Supreme Court · 1886
- People v. HowardCalifornia Supreme Court · 1896
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by15 opinions
- People v. Pompa-OrtizCalifornia Supreme Court · 1980
- Jennings v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1967
- People v. PerryCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1969
- In Re Van BruntCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1966
- People v. KonowCalifornia Supreme Court · 2004
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.