People v. Foo
California Supreme Court
Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County and from an order denying a new trial. B. Ñ. Smith, Judge. The facts are stated in the opinion.
1Opinion of the Court
Searls, C.
The defendant was informed against, with two others, viz., Lee Kim and Ah Young, for an assault with a deadly weapon upon one Hom Lock, alleged to have been committed at the county of Los Angeles, state of California, on the twelfth day of January, 1895.
The defendants demurred to the information upon the ground: “1. That said information does not substantially conform to the requirements of sections 950, 951, and 952 of the Penal Code of California; 2. That the facts stated in said information do not constitute a public offense.”
Their demurrer was overruled, whereupon they entered a…
2Cases cited16 opinions
- People v. FrankCalifornia Supreme Court · 1865
- Satterlee v. BlissCalifornia Supreme Court · 1869
- People v. McCreaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1867
- Crocker v. CarpenterCalifornia Supreme Court · 1893
- People V. EstradoCalifornia Supreme Court · 1874
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by16 opinions
- People v. LaparaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1919
- People v. WattsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1926
- People v. KramerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1897
- Sanders v. DavisSupreme Court of Alabama · 1907
- People v. SimonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1927
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.