People v. Nickell
California Court of Appeal
1Opinion of the CourtHouseb, P. J.
From a judgment of conviction of the commission by him of the crime of subornation of perjury, as well as from an order by which his motion for a new trial was denied, defendant has appealed to this court.
On the point that “the verdict is contrary to law and the evidence”, appellant asserts that, considering the language of the statute (sec. 1103a, Pen. Code), which provides, that “perjury must be proved by the testimony of two witnesses, or of one witness and corroborating circumstances”, the evidence was insufficient to support the judgment.
It appears that the prosecution of defendant arose…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- People v. CoffeyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1911
- Ex parte VollCalifornia Supreme Court · 1871
- In Re HenleyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1912
- People v. WilliamsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1881
- People v. LaymanCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1931
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by12 opinions
- People v. ClappCalifornia Supreme Court · 1944
- People v. ObieCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1974
- People v. JonesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1967
- People v. SavageCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1944
- People v. RissmanCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1957
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.