Legal Opinion

People v. Baker

California Supreme Court

Decided July 15, 1968No. Crim. 12008PublishedCited by 60 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtPeters, J.

On October 26, 1966, after a trial without a jury, defendant was convicted of violating Penal Code section 285, incest. The court dismissed a second count charging a violation of Penal Code section 261, subdivision 3, forcible rape.

It was stipulated that the prosecutrix, defendant’s niece, is *46related to him only by the half blood; that is, her mother is defendant’s half sister.

Defendant’s principal contention is that Penal Code section 285’s prohibition against fornication by an uncle and his niece does not apply where they are related by the half blood.

Section 285, enacted in 1872 and…

2Cases cited26 opinions

  1. People v. JennesMichigan Supreme Court · 1858
  2. In Re HubbardCalifornia Supreme Court · 1964
  3. People v. HallnerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1954
  4. In re ZerbeCalifornia Supreme Court · 1964
  5. Martin v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1917

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

3Cited by60 opinions

  1. Keeler v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1970
  2. People v. CaudilloCalifornia Supreme Court · 1978
  3. Nino v. Gladys R.California Supreme Court · 1970
  4. Walker v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1988
  5. Morse v. Municipal CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1974

55 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