Legal Opinion · Dissent

People v. Long

California Supreme Court

Decided June 27, 1940No. Crim. 4286Published

1Dissent

CARTER, J., Dissenting.

I dissent.

In my opinion the giving of the instruction to the jury: “that you may regard the testimony of an expert as merely advisory, and you are instructed that you may disregard altogether the testimony of such expert, and you may form your own conclusions from all the evidence submitted to you”, constituted prejudicial error and justifies a reversal of this case.

The majority opinion states:

“There can be no doubt that the deceased was suffering from a heart affected with a mitral stenosis—that is, the mitral valve of the heart had become infected and had become…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Perkins v. TruebloodCalifornia Supreme Court · 1919
  2. Hirshfeld v. DanaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1924
  3. Houghton v. DicksonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1916
  4. William Simpson Construction Co. v. Industrial Accident CommissionCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1925
  5. Dameron v. AnsbroCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1918

4 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