People v. Thornton
California Supreme Court
Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, and from an order refusing a new trial. The libel of which the defendants were convicted was ■contained in a pamphlet published by them, entitled Life of Horace Bell.” The further facts are stated in ■the opinion of Mr. Justice Sharpstein.
1Opinion of the CourtSharpstein, J.
The defendants were tried on an information for libel. They were convicted, moved for a new trial, which was denied, and from the judgment and •an order denying a new trial, have appealed. One of the .grounds on which they moved for a new trial is, that “ the jury separated, without leave of the court, after retiring to deliberate upon their verdict.”
1. The record shows that the jury retired to their room about ten p. m. to deliberate upon their verdict, and after remaining there two hours or more, and before agreeing upon a verdict, they left their room, accompanied by the officer having…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- People v. BackusCalifornia Supreme Court · 1855
- People v. BranniganCalifornia Supreme Court · 1863
3Cited by11 opinions
- Elmer v. FessendenMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1890
- Saltzman v. Sunset Telephone & Telegraph Co.California Supreme Court · 1899
- Bilton v. TerritoryCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · 1909
- People v. MartinCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1948
- State v. MorganUtah Supreme Court · 1901
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.