Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

People v. Clarke

California Court of Appeal

Decided November 29, 1956No. Nov. 29, 1956Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in partSwain, J.

I concur and dissent. I concur in that part of the opinion which holds that one year is the maximum jail sentence which may be imposed for violating Penal Code, section 270, but there are other errors for which the judgment should be reversed and a new trial had.

There is no merit to appellant’s claim that he cannot be prosecuted criminally for failing to provide for an illegitimate child until it had been established by a civil action that he is its father. The law on that point, adverse to appellant’s claim, was established in People v. Stanley (1917), 33 Cal.App 624 [166 P. 596], and People…

2Cases cited16 opinions

  1. United States v. MurdockSupreme Court of the United States · 1934
  2. People v. PutnamCalifornia Supreme Court · 1942
  3. People v. VogelCalifornia Supreme Court · 1956
  4. In Re TrombleyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1948
  5. Matter of Application of AhartCalifornia Supreme Court · 1916

11 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