Legal Opinion

People v. Neber

California Supreme Court

Decided August 10, 1899No. Crim. No. 527PublishedCited by 4 opinions

APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Sapa County. E. D. Ham, Judge. The facts are stated in the opinion.

1Opinion of the Court

BRITT, C.

Defendant was convicted in this action of the crime of burglary in the second degree, perpetrated by entering a certain building with intent to commit larceny therein. Hie charge of the judge to the jury at the trial included the following matter: “The mere fact that a person is found in the possession of property recently stolen, if such be the fact, and established by the evidence beyond a reasonable doubt, is not in and of itself sufficient to warrant a conviction of the party either of larceny or burglary. There must be evidence outside of, or beyond or independent of, the fact…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. People v. DoyellCalifornia Supreme Court · 1874
  2. People v. FlynnCalifornia Supreme Court · 1887
  3. People v. WordenCalifornia Supreme Court · 1896

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. People v. CainCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1907
  2. People v. McCannCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1939
  3. People v. GrowCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1911
  4. People v. StevensCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1911

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API