People v. Moore
California Court of Appeal
1Opinion of the CourtConrey, P. J.
As presented to the court by appellant, the appeal herein is based solely upon the contention that the district attorney, in the trial of the case, was guilty of misconduct prejudicial to the defendant. The conduct of which appellant complains had relation to an attempt made by the district attorney to ascertain whether or not the defendant would permit the prosecution to call the defendant’s husband and obtain his testimony as a witness for the People. “Neither husband nor wife is a competent witness for or against the other in a criminal action or proceeding to which one or both are…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- People v. SinghCalifornia Supreme Court · 1920
3Cited by12 opinions
- People v. KlinkenbergCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1949
- People v. KlorCalifornia Supreme Court · 1948
- People v. WilkinsCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1955
- People v. NeyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1965
- People v. HarmonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1948
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.