Legal Opinion

In Re Wignall

California Supreme Court

Decided March 13, 1924No. Crim. No. 2653PublishedCited by 8 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

At the conclusion of the oral argument the Chief Justice made the following statement:

[1] The Chief Justice: The members of the court are satisfied that the first judgment pronounced by the trial court, which recited the verdict of the jury finding the petitioner guilty of the offense stated in the information, to wit, a conspiracy to obtain personal property to a value of more than one hundred dollars by false pretenses, was a sufficient sentence of the defendant for the term provided by law for conspiracy to commit a felony, that is, a sentence for the maximum term of ten years, as we…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Ex parte KirbyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1888
  2. In Re MannCalifornia Supreme Court · 1923

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. In Re QuinnCalifornia Supreme Court · 1945
  2. People v. HayesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1935
  3. People v. ClementCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1929
  4. Isett v. FreesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1938
  5. Hanson v. North Dakota Workmen's Compensation BureauNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1933

3 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