Legal Opinion

People v. Eisenberg

California Court of Appeal

Decided October 17, 1968No. Crim. 14063PublishedCited by 8 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

DRUCKER, J. pro tem. *

The defendant's appeal from his conviction of forgery is based upon the grounds, (1) insufficiency of the evidence and (2) prejudicial error by the court in allowing cross-examination of the defendant, over his objection, beyond the scope of his direct testimony.

Considering, as we must, the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution (People v. Sweeney, 55 Cal.2d 27, 33 [9 Cal.Rptr. 793, 357 P.2d 1049]; People v. Kristy, 111 Cal.App.2d 695, 698 [245 P.2d 547]) it appears from the record that there is substantial evidence to support the judgment of conviction.

O…

2Cases cited17 opinions

  1. People v. BassettCalifornia Supreme Court · 1968
  2. People v. SweeneyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1960
  3. People v. WestekCalifornia Supreme Court · 1948
  4. People v. PikeCalifornia Supreme Court · 1962
  5. People v. ZerilloCalifornia Supreme Court · 1950

12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. People v. SpencerCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1972
  2. People v. JamesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1976
  3. People v. TraylorCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1972
  4. People v. TownsendCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1971
  5. People v. HernandezCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1976

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