Legal Opinion

People v. Hatch

California Supreme Court

Decided August 2, 1912No. Crim. No. 1706PublishedCited by 39 opinions

The facts are stated in the opinion of the court. Frank Freeman, Owen D. Richardson, and Harry I. Stafford, for Appellant. U. S. Webb, Attorney-General, J. Charles Jones, Deputy Attorney-General, and Raymond Benjamin, Deputy Attorney-General, for Respondent.

1Opinion of the Court

THE COURT.

This appeal from the judgment and from an order denying defendant’s motion for a new trial comes to this court in consequence of the inability of the justices of the district court of appeal for the first appellate district, to which the appeal was taken, to agree upon a judgment. Two of the justices of said court were of the opinion that the judgment and order should be reversed on account of errors in the admission and rejection of evidence, while the third justice expressed the view that the rulings in question, if erroneous, were not prejudicial to the appellant. All three…

2Cases cited16 opinions

  1. People v. FrankCalifornia Supreme Court · 1865
  2. People v. WardCalifornia Supreme Court · 1901
  3. People v. JonesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1898
  4. People v. SandersCalifornia Supreme Court · 1896
  5. People v. ShotwellCalifornia Supreme Court · 1865

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

3Cited by39 opinions

  1. People v. SelbyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1926
  2. People v. LetourneauCalifornia Supreme Court · 1949
  3. People v. MooreCalifornia Supreme Court · 1954
  4. People v. BringhurstCalifornia Supreme Court · 1923
  5. People v. HendersonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1947

34 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