People v. Reinhart
California Supreme Court
Appeal from the County Court, City and County of San Francisco. The facts are stated in the opinion.
1Opinion of the CourtRhodes, C. J.
The defendant was sworn and examined as a witness in his own behalf, and, on cross-examination, he was asked whether he had not been convicted of certain offenses. He now insists that it was erroneous for the Court to compel him to answer those questions. We held in Clark v. Reese (35 Cal. 96), that when a party to the action becomes a witness in his own behalf, he drops, for the time being, the character of a party, and takes on that of a witness, and that his privilege is no greater than that of any other witness. He may refuse to answer the question whether he has been previously convicted…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Newcomb v. . GriswoldNew York Court of Appeals · 1862
- People v. HerrickNew York Supreme Court · 1816
- Clark v. ReeseCalifornia Supreme Court · 1868
3Cited by20 opinions
- People v. RozelleCalifornia Supreme Court · 1888
- State v. BaconOregon Supreme Court · 1886
- People v. MelvaneCalifornia Supreme Court · 1870
- Anderson v. StateWyoming Supreme Court · 1921
- Williams v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1924
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.