People v. Simpson
California Court of Appeal
1Opinion of the CourtTyler, P. J.
Defendant was charged, tried, and convicted of the crime of pimping as defined by the statute (Stats. 1911, p. 10). A motion for a new trial was made and denied. This appeal is from the judgment and order. The evidence is of a sordid character, but it is unnecessary for a discussion of the case to review it extensively. Briefly stated, it discloses the following facts: Defendant operated in the city of Fresno what is designáted in the record as a massage parlor. The establishment was frequented by male patrons and the duties of the female attendants employed by defendant was to bathe and…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- People v. LeyshonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1895
- Ford v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1911
- People v. FuskiCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1920
- People v. ChutnacutCalifornia Supreme Court · 1904
- People v. BreenCalifornia Supreme Court · 1900
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by9 opinions
- Williams v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1973
- People v. YoungCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1933
- People v. BergerCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1960
- State of Oregon v. McCowanOregon Supreme Court · 1955
- People v. FrayerCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1956
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.