People v. Green
California Supreme Court
Appeal from, the Court of Sessions, Tuolumne county. The point taken by defendant was on demurrer to the indictment, and by motion in arrest of judgment. When the case was called for trial, defendant moved for a continuance, on account of the absence of witnesses, “ by whom he alleged he could prove that he was the owner and in possession of some three hundred dollars in gold coin on the day before the alleged larceny.
Read the full summary
Appeal from, the Court of Sessions, Tuolumne county. The point taken by defendant was on demurrer to the indictment, and by motion in arrest of judgment. When the case was called for trial, defendant moved for a continuance, on account of the absence of witnesses, “ by whom he alleged he could prove that he was the owner and in possession of some three hundred dollars in gold coin on the day before the alleged larceny. Whereupon the prosecuting attorney admitted the testimony, and went to trial.” The Court, among other things, instructed the jury, that the facts upon which the continuance was…
1Opinion of the CourtBaldwin, J.
Field, C. J. concurring.
Defendant was indicted for grand larceny, and was convicted. The indictment is as follows:
“That said Charles Green, on the ninth day of December, 1859, at the county of Tuolumne, willfully and feloniously did steal, take and carry away, of the personal property of one Smith Whiting, then and there being, fifteen twenty dollar pieces, and twenty-five ten dollar pieces, and ten five dollar pieces, of the gold coin of the United States, of the value of five hundred and fifty dollars, contrary to the statute in such case made and provided, and against the peace of the…
2Cited by3 opinions
- State v. QuackenbushSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1906
- People v. PoggiCalifornia Supreme Court · 1862
- People v. RogersCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1917