Legal Opinion

People v. Vaughan

California Court of Appeal

Decided April 17, 1933No. Docket No. 2323PublishedCited by 30 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

DESMOND, J., pro tem.

The defendant was convicted of violating section 288a of the Penal Code in relation to a girl eleven years old; also upon another count of the same information of violating section 288 of the Penal Code involving another girl of the same age. Attached to the verdict and ordered filed by the court was a slip of paper reading as follows: “If admissible, the jury would like to recommend leniency.” Motion for a new trial was denied and defendant sentenced on each count to San Quentin State Prison for the term provided by law, one sentence to follow the other.

The defendant…

2Cases cited16 opinions

  1. People v. BensonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1856
  2. People v. BaldwinCalifornia Supreme Court · 1897
  3. People v. AnthonyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1921
  4. People v. Wong LoungCalifornia Supreme Court · 1911
  5. People v. DegnenCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1925

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

3Cited by30 opinions

  1. People v. PutnamCalifornia Supreme Court · 1942
  2. People v. PerryCalifornia Supreme Court · 1939
  3. People v. StanleyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1967
  4. People v. AdamsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1939
  5. People v. HurlburtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1958

25 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