Legal Opinion

People v. Knutte

California Supreme Court

Decided March 6, 1896No. Crim. No. 63PublishedCited by 38 opinions

Appeal from an order of the Superior Court of the City and County of San Francisco granting a new trial. George H. Bahrs, Judge. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.

1Opinion of the CourtVan Fleet, J.

Respondent was tried for the offense of obtaining money and property by false pretenses. At the conclusion of the evidence in chief for the prosecution the court advised the jury to acquit, for the reason that in the judgment of the court the case had not been established; and the case was then submitted to the jury upon the instructions of the court, without evidence on behalf of defendant, or argument of counsel. The jury, notwithstanding the advice of the court, found the defendant guilty, and thereupon the court of its own motion made an order setting aside the verdict, and granting the…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Blankman v. VallejoCalifornia Supreme Court · 1860
  2. People v. Lum YitCalifornia Supreme Court · 1890
  3. People v. AshnauerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1873
  4. People v. HotzCalifornia Supreme Court · 1887

3Cited by38 opinions

  1. People v. SarazzawskiCalifornia Supreme Court · 1945
  2. People v. FerlinCalifornia Supreme Court · 1928
  3. People v. RobargeCalifornia Supreme Court · 1953
  4. People v. MegladderyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1940
  5. People v. SelbyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1926

33 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