People v. Matezuski
California Court of Appeal
APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, and from an order denying a new trial. Curtis D. Wilbur, Judge. The instruction as to the word “abet” and as to the “corroboration of an accomplice,” referred to in the opinion of the court, are inserted in the syllabi from the transcript. Further facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the CourtTaggart, J.
Information for grand larceny. Verdict of guilty. Defendant appeals from judgment, and an order denying his motion for -a new trial.
It is contended by appellant that the verdict is not supported by the evidence because it tends to establish burglary as well as grand larceny. If it be conceded that larceny is not included in a charge of burglary, and that evidence of a conviction of one of these crimes would not sustain a plea of former conviction, upon a trial of a charge of the other (People v. Devlin, 143 Cal. 128, [76 Pac. 900] ), the jury may, nevertheless, determine from evidence which…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- People v. AmayaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1901
- People v. ComptonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1899
- People v. BalkwellCalifornia Supreme Court · 1904
- People v. DevlinCalifornia Supreme Court · 1904
- People v. MilesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1904
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- People v. CascinoCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1934
- Pueblo v. DelgadoSupreme Court of Puerto Rico · 1936
- People v. BerkeleyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1935
- People v. ElliottCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1930
- Pueblo v. Alvarez PaduvaniSupreme Court of Puerto Rico · 1940
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.