Legal Opinion

People v. James

California Court of Appeal

Decided September 13, 1935No. Crim. 2778PublishedCited by 13 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

FRICKE, J., pro tem.

Appeal from judgment and order denying a new trial. Defendant was convicted of a violation of section 288 of the Penal Code, the offense being committed upon his five-year-old daughter. The sole question presented on this appeal is whether it was error to permit appellant’s wife, the mother of the child, to testify against him over objection.

While the wife of a defendant in a criminal action is, under section 1322 of the Penal Code, generally not a competent witness against him, that section contains various exceptions to this general rule, among which is in cases of…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. People v. BradburyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1907
  2. People v. BabcockCalifornia Supreme Court · 1911
  3. People v. ParkerCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1925
  4. People v. CurialeCalifornia Supreme Court · 1902
  5. People v. WillCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1926

3Cited by13 opinions

  1. People v. FlummerfeltCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1957
  2. Eby v. StateIndiana Court of Appeals · 1972
  3. State v. WatsonCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1990
  4. United States v. SeverUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1994
  5. People v. PretzerCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1992

8 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