Legal Opinion

People v. Paysen

California Court of Appeal

Decided May 10, 1932No. Docket No. 2174PublishedCited by 37 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

FRICKE, J., pro tem.

Appellant was tried by a jury and convicted of burglary in the second degree, after having suffered a prior conviction of grand larceny. , A motion for a new trial -was denied and thereafter appellant made a second motion for a new trial, and, that being denied, made application for a writ of coram nolis, which was also denied.

Appellant’s first assignment is that the court erred in receiving in evidence the testimony of the complaining witness given by her at the preliminary examination over the objection that such testimony was hearsay “ ambiguous and unintelligent”, that…

2Cases cited23 opinions

  1. People v. ReidCalifornia Supreme Court · 1924
  2. People v. MooneyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1918
  3. People v. BuckleyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1904
  4. People v. ByrneCalifornia Supreme Court · 1911
  5. People v. OxnamCalifornia Supreme Court · 1915

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

3Cited by37 opinions

  1. People v. ShipmanCalifornia Supreme Court · 1965
  2. People v. TuthillCalifornia Supreme Court · 1948
  3. People v. HenselCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1965
  4. People v. PinedaCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1967
  5. People v. WelchCalifornia Supreme Court · 1964

32 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