People v. Carrillo
California Supreme Court
Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of Sonoma County, and from an order refusing a new trial. The defendant was convicted on circumstantial evidence of the crime of grand larceny. The further facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the CourtMcKinstry, J.
In the margin, opposite to instruction No. 5 requested by the prosecution, the judge of the Superior Court wrote, “Given,—the word ‘possible’ *642inserted in reading in two places.” There is nothing to indicate where the word was inserted “in reading.” The instruction to that extent was not in writing; because there is no evidence in writing of the instruction as actually given. But it is not necessary to say that for this reason alone the judgment should be reversed.
As reduced to writing, the instruction is as follows: —
1 “ The jury must be satisfied from
2 the evidence of the guilt of the
3…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- People v. PhippsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1870
- State v. Steamship ConstitutionCalifornia Supreme Court · 1872
- People v. HerseyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1879
- People v. KerrickCalifornia Supreme Court · 1877
- People v. BrownCalifornia Supreme Court · 1880
3Cited by2 opinions
- People v. KaiserCalifornia Supreme Court · 1897
- State v. RyanMontana Supreme Court · 1892