Legal Opinion

People v. Hurlburt

California Court of Appeal

Decided December 18, 1958No. Crim. 3535PublishedCited by 57 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtPeters, P. J.

In a prosecution for a violation of section 288 of the Penal Code the trial court ruled that defense counsel could neither cross-examine the complaining witness nor introduce evidence on the question as to whether the witness had, in the past, made similar charges against other men, which charges the witness had admitted were false or were proved to be false. In our opinion such rulings were erroneous, and under the facts, prejudicial.

As is usual in such cases, the prosecution was forced to rely primarily on the testimony of the complaining witness to establish its case, while the defense, by…

2Cases cited33 opinions

  1. People v. PutnamCalifornia Supreme Court · 1942
  2. People v. LyonsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1956
  3. People v. BensonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1856
  4. People v. EvansMichigan Supreme Court · 1888
  5. Wedmore v. StateIndiana Supreme Court · 1957

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

3Cited by57 opinions

  1. Hammer v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 2009
  2. Ballard v. Superior Court of San Diego CountyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1966
  3. People v. BurtonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1961
  4. State v. AndersonMontana Supreme Court · 1984
  5. Clinebell v. CommonwealthSupreme Court of Virginia · 1988

52 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