Legal Opinion

People v. Smith

California Supreme Court

Decided April 10, 1896No. Crim. No. 86PublishedCited by 27 opinions

Appeal from, a judgment of the Superior Court of Mendocino County and from an order denying a new trial. R. McGarvey, Judge. The facts are stated in the opinion.

1Opinion of the Court

Belcher, C.

The defendant was charged by information with the crime of grand larceny, committed in the county of Mendocino, in the month of December, 1894, by stealing a brindle steer, which “ was then and there the personal property of another, belonging to and being then owned by Joseph Elledge and Mrs. M. J. Elledge, as executor and executrix of the estate of W. C. Elledge, deceased.” He was found guilty as charged, and the judgment was that he be punished by imprisonment in the state prison for the term of four years. From that judgment and an order denying his motion for a new trial he…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. People v. WallaceCalifornia Supreme Court · 1892
  2. People v. Leong QuongCalifornia Supreme Court · 1882
  3. Hunt v. StateSupreme Court of Alabama · 1876
  4. People v. HallCalifornia Supreme Court · 1861

3Cited by27 opinions

  1. People v. FosterCalifornia Supreme Court · 1926
  2. People v. ArmstrongCalifornia Supreme Court · 1896
  3. McIntosh v. StateNebraska Supreme Court · 1920
  4. People v. PratherCalifornia Supreme Court · 1898
  5. People v. NunleyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1904

22 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