Legal Opinion

People v. Falk

California Court of Appeal

Decided October 27, 1952No. Crim. 4822PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtWhite, P. J.

Defendant was accused in an information filed by the district attorney of Los Angeles County with a violation of Health and Safety Code, section 11500, in that she had in her possession cannabis sativa, commonly known as marijuana.

Following the entry of a plea of not guilty the cause proceeded to trial before a jury which found her guilty as charged. Following denial of a motion for a new trial judgment was pronounced.

Defendant prosecutes this appeal “from the judgment and verdict . . . and from the denial of defendant’s motion for a new trial . . . and from the sentence rendered . . .” Since…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. People v. NewlandCalifornia Supreme Court · 1940
  2. People v. GoryCalifornia Supreme Court · 1946
  3. People v. TallmanCalifornia Supreme Court · 1945
  4. People v. BigelowCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1951
  5. People v. GallagherCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1936

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

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. People v. MasseyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1957
  2. People v. BasnettCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1960
  3. People v. DouglasCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1956
  4. Davis v. StateMississippi Supreme Court · 1969
  5. People v. CroxtonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1958

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API