Legal Opinion

People v. Ruiz

California Supreme Court

Decided July 27, 1904No. Crim. No. 1080PublishedCited by 24 opinions

The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.

1Opinion of the CourtVan Dyke, J.

Defendant was informed against by the district attorney of Los Angeles County for the crime of grand larceny, in stealing two calves. He was convicted and sentenced to imprisonment for six years. The notice of appeal states that the appeal is taken from the judgment, from an order denying a new trial, from a motion in arrest of judgment, and from the verdict. No appeal lies from the last two mentioned, and the bill of exceptions fails to show what, if any, action was taken by the court on the motion for a new trial. There is printed in the transcript what purports to be a “motion for a new…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. People v. WardripCalifornia Supreme Court · 1903
  2. People v. RileyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1884
  3. People v. HolmesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1899

3Cited by24 opinions

  1. People v. DailCalifornia Supreme Court · 1943
  2. People v. GuiuanCalifornia Supreme Court · 1998
  3. Hirshfeld v. DanaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1924
  4. People v. RyanCalifornia Supreme Court · 1907
  5. People v. CraigCalifornia Supreme Court · 1907

19 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