Legal Opinion

People v. Wardrip

California Supreme Court

Decided December 3, 1903No. Crim. No. 982PublishedCited by 38 opinions

APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Sacramento County and from an order denying a new trial. E. C. Hart, Judge. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.

1Opinion of the Court

McFARLAND, J.—

The defendant was charged with the murder of one Hugh Duffy. He first pleaded “Guilty,” but afterwards withdrew that plea and pleaded “Not guilty.” He was convicted of murder in the first degree, and judgment of death followed. He appeals from the judgment and from an order denying the motion for a new trial.

The main contentions of appellant for a reversal are based on the refusal of the court to give certain instructions asked by appellant, and those discussed in the briefs are numbers 18, 19, 22, 25, and 26.

Number 26 is merely a statement to the jury that if they should find…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Kauffman v. MaierCalifornia Supreme Court · 1892
  2. People v. O'BrienCalifornia Supreme Court · 1892
  3. People v. SandersCalifornia Supreme Court · 1896
  4. People v. NewcomerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1897

3Cited by38 opinions

  1. People v. GuiuanCalifornia Supreme Court · 1998
  2. People v. NorthcottCalifornia Supreme Court · 1930
  3. Hirshfeld v. DanaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1924
  4. People v. BemisCalifornia Supreme Court · 1949
  5. People v. RyanCalifornia Supreme Court · 1907

33 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API