People v. McCrory
California Supreme Court
Appeal from the District Court of the Thirteenth Judicial District, County of Tulare. The defendant was indicted for murder at the January term of the Court, 1871, and a motion for a continuance until the first day of the succeeding May term, on account of the absence of material witnesses, was granted.
Read the full summary
Appeal from the District Court of the Thirteenth Judicial District, County of Tulare. The defendant was indicted for murder at the January term of the Court, 1871, and a motion for a continuance until the first day of the succeeding May term, on account of the absence of material witnesses, was granted. A few days subsequently, at the same term, on motion of the District Attorney, the Court vacated the order of continuance, and set the case for trial on the twentieth of February following, the defendant excepting. When the case came on for trial, Ihe defendant moved for a continuance until…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court, Crockett, J.:
The Court erred in denying the motion made by the defendant on the 20th February, 1871, to continue the cause for the term. There was a sufficient showing as to the materiality of the absent witnesses, and there was apparently no lack of diligence in the effort to procure their attendance. The Attorney General has failed to point out any particular wherein the affidavit was defective, and I discover none. I think the showing was sufficient, and the motion should have been granted; particularly, as this was the first application for a continuance. B or can it be said…
2Cited by34 opinions
- Kercheval v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1927
- People v. ManriquezCalifornia Supreme Court · 1922
- People v. CollinsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1925
- People v. WattsCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1977
- People v. McGarvyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1943
29 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.