Legal Opinion

People v. Huntington

California Supreme Court

Decided January 3, 1903No. Crim. No. 854PublishedCited by 27 opinions

The facts are stated in the opinion of the court. Robert Ferral, Daniel J. Murphy, Thomas D. Riordan, and P. F. Dunne, for Appellant. Tirey L. Ford, Attorney-General, A. A. Moore, Jr., Deputy Attorney-General, and U. S. Webb, Attorney-General, George A. Sturtevant, Deputy Attorney-General, and E. B. Power, Deputy Attorney-General, for Respondent.

1Opinion of the CourtMcFARLAND, J.

The information charged defendant with murder, and the jury returned a verdict of manslaughter, upon which judgment was rendered, sentencing him to ten years’ imprisonment in the state prison. He appeals from the judgment and from an order denying his motion for a new trial.

Appellant contends that the following instruction was erroneous: “ ‘Moral certainty’ is that degree of proof which the law requires of moral evidence. ‘Moral certainty’ is described as a state of impression produced by facts in which a reasonable mind feels a sort of coercion or necessity to act in accordance with it.” In…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. People v. TapiaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1901
  2. People v. VereneseneckockockhoffCalifornia Supreme Court · 1900

3Cited by27 opinions

  1. People v. PowellCalifornia Supreme Court · 1949
  2. People v. LewisCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1960
  3. People v. WrightCalifornia Supreme Court · 1914
  4. People v. BalkwellCalifornia Supreme Court · 1904
  5. People v. GarciaCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1975

22 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