People v. Shea
California Supreme Court
Appeal from the Court of Sessions of Stanislaus County; The*defendant was indicted for an assault with intent to commit murder, and was convicted and sentenced for an assault with an intent to commit bodily injury. The bill of exceptions contains only a small portion of the testimony, and none of the instructions given by the Court.
Read the full summary
Appeal from the Court of Sessions of Stanislaus County; The*defendant was indicted for an assault with intent to commit murder, and was convicted and sentenced for an assault with an intent to commit bodily injury. The bill of exceptions contains only a small portion of the testimony, and none of the instructions given by the Court. On the trial, the prosecutor, Daniel Perrigru, was examined as a witness, and upon cross-examination, the prisoner’s counsel asked the witness, “if he did not buy a pistol, a few days previous to the assault, to use upon the person of Shea, the defendant?” The…
1Opinion of the Court
Burnett, J., after stating the facts, delivered the opinion of the Court—Field, J., concurring.
The objection on the part of the prisoner does not seem, un*539der the circumstances, to have been well taken. The intention of the prisoner’s counsel was to prove the simple fact that the prosecutor had purchased the pistol “ to use upon the person” of the prisoner, and from this circumstance, to leave the jury to infer that the witness purchased the instrument with the "intent to assault the prisoner, and not use it in his own defence. The attorney for the State had then the right to ask the witness…
2Cited by4 opinions
- Central Heights Improvement Co. v. Memorial Parks, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 1940
- State v. HarrisSupreme Court of Missouri · 1882
- Wambole v. FooteSupreme Court Of The Territory Of Dakota · 1878
- Upthegrove v. StateOhio Supreme Court · 1882