People v. Wong Ah Foo
California Supreme Court
Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of the city and county of San Francisco, and from an order refusing a new trial The declarations of the deceased referred to in the opinion were to the effect that the defendant was the person who shot him. The further facts are stated in the opinion.
1Opinion of the Court
Foote, C.
The defendant was found guilty by a jury of murder in the first degree; from the judgment of conviction, and the order denying his motion for a new trial, he prosecutes this appeal.
The declarations of the man slain were properly admitted in evidence, in the exercise by the court of a sound discretion. They had been made only a very few moments preceding his death, and appear to have been uttered, if not in the immediate presence of the accused, yet before the latter had proceeded more than across Clay Street, from the place where the deceased fell wounded, following almost eo…
2Cited by10 opinions
- People v. ArnoldCalifornia Supreme Court · 1926
- People v. LevineCalifornia Supreme Court · 1890
- People v. CostelloCalifornia Supreme Court · 1943
- People v. BushCalifornia Supreme Court · 1887
- Ware v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1894
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.