Legal Opinion

People v. Malgren

California Court of Appeal

Decided January 19, 1983No. Crim. 23419PublishedCited by 24 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion

SCOTT, Acting P. J.

Ronald Fred Malgren was convicted by a jury of burglary (Pen. Code, § 459). He contends: (1) evidence of dog tracking was improperly admitted; (2) the evidence was insufficient to support the conviction; (3) the trial court should have instructed sua sponte that dog tracking evidence should be viewed with caution and does not by itself warrant a conviction; and (4) the court should not have instructed on flight.

I

Viewed in the light most favorable to the judgment, the evidence established the following. Teenagers John and Amy Cox returned to their Burlingame *237home one…

2Cases cited25 opinions

  1. People v. WatsonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1956
  2. People v. JohnsonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1980
  3. People v. FlannelCalifornia Supreme Court · 1979
  4. People v. KellyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1976
  5. People v. WickershamCalifornia Supreme Court · 1982

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

3Cited by24 opinions

  1. People v. JacksonCalifornia Supreme Court · 2016
  2. People v. JonesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1991
  3. People v. WesterfieldCalifornia Supreme Court · 2019
  4. People v. HousleyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1992
  5. People v. NajeraCalifornia Supreme Court · 2008

19 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