Legal Opinion

People v. Land

California Court of Appeal

Decided March 2, 1934No. Docket No. 2439PublishedCited by 10 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

ARCHBALD, J., pro tem.

Defendant and one Walter Blankenship were jointly charged in an information filed by the district attorney of Los Angeles County with the crime of grand theft. On the trial of defendant Land the jury returned a verdict of guilty. Prom the judgment of conviction entered upon said verdict and from the order denying his motion for a new trial, defendant Land has appealed.

Appellant urges (1) that the court erred in permitting the testimony of a witness taken at the preliminary hearing to be read in evidence at the trial, and (2) that the verdict lacks the support of…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. People v. RamosCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1921
  2. People v. FayCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1927

3Cited by10 opinions

  1. People v. McIlvainCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1942
  2. People v. HornCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1964
  3. People v. HoraceCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1954
  4. People v. LathamCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1941
  5. People v. VolkCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1963

5 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