Legal Opinion

People v. Howard

California Court of Appeal

Decided September 9, 1916No. Crim. No. 345. Third Appellate DistrictPublishedCited by 6 opinions

APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of San Joaquin County, and from an order denying a new trial. C. W. Norton, Judge. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.

1Opinion of the CourtHart, J.

The defendant was convicted of the crime of grand larceny, and appeals from the judgment of conviction and the order denying his motion for a new trial.

The information is in three counts, each stating a different offense, viz.: The first charging the larceny of $305 in money, the second the embezzlement of said sum, and the third the receiving of said money knowing it to have been previously stolen.

The attack upon the verdict is upon numerous grounds, which, generally stated, are that the court erred in overruling the demurrer to the information, in disallowing certain voir dire questions by…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. People v. RaeCalifornia Supreme Court · 1885
  2. People v. TomlinsonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1894

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. People v. KellyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1928
  2. People v. YoudersCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1950
  3. People v. KnoxCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1916
  4. People v. PotigianCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1924
  5. Pueblo v. Rivera GuzmánSupreme Court of Puerto Rico · 1970

1 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