Legal Opinion

People v. Beilfuss

California Court of Appeal

Decided June 7, 1943No. Crim. 3596PublishedCited by 20 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

SHAW, J. pro tem.

The defendant was charged in each of twelve counts of an information with grand theft. He was tried without a jury and convicted on all counts. Later his motion for a new trial was granted as to counts II, VI and XI, and those counts were dismissed. He appeals from the judgments entered on the remaining counts and from an order denying his motion for a new trial.

Each count charges a theft of money from the same persons, Miss Caroline A. Ingersoll and Miss Frances L. Proctor, the amounts and dates being different. The two ladies mentioned were past eighty years of age and had…

2Cases cited17 opinions

  1. People v. MayenCalifornia Supreme Court · 1922
  2. People v. GonzalesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1942
  3. People v. FosterCalifornia Supreme Court · 1926
  4. People v. MartinCalifornia Supreme Court · 1894
  5. People v. DelbosCalifornia Supreme Court · 1905

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

3Cited by20 opinions

  1. People v. FujitaCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1974
  2. People v. ChaitCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1945
  3. People v. SmithCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1984
  4. People v. PeakCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1944
  5. People v. McCabeCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1943

15 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