People v. Beggs
California Supreme Court
The facts are stated in the opinion of the court. ■ James P. Sex, R. P. Henshall, R. C. McComish, and A. H. Jarman, for Appellant. U. S. Webb, Attorney-General, John H. Riordan, Deputy Attorney-General, Arthur M. Free, District Attorney, and Archer Bowden, Deputy District Attorney, for Respondent.
1Opinion of the Court
VICTOR E. SHAW, J., pro tem.
D efendant, who is an attorney at law, appeals from the judgment pronounced upon the verdict of a jury finding him guilty of the crime of extortion as defined in section 518 of the Penal Code.
The verdict was based upon facts which the evidence tended to establish, as follows: Joseph Steining was the proprietor of a store from which goods had from time to time been stolen. Acting upon information which pointed to Joseph N. Da Rosa, an employee- of the store, as the one guilty of the thefts, Steining caused him to be arrested by a detective and taken to the police…
2Cases cited18 opinions
- People v. CoffeyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1911
- People v. SchmitzCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1908
- People v. KrompholdCalifornia Supreme Court · 1916
- McDonald v. PeopleIllinois Supreme Court · 1888
- People v. SchaferCalifornia Supreme Court · 1911
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by55 opinions
- People v. GreenCalifornia Supreme Court · 1980
- Flatley v. MauroCalifornia Supreme Court · 2006
- Boris Levitt v. Yelp! Inc.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2014
- People v. TufungaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1999
- Traxler v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · 1952
50 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.