Legal Opinion

People v. Otis

California Court of Appeal

Decided September 29, 1959No. Crim. 3640PublishedCited by 34 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtTobriner, J.

Appellant here cannot properly complain of the court’s failure to instruct that fear of serious bodily harm constitutes duress if neither the instruction, nor the facts of the case itself, compose a present, active and immediate peril of such harm. Nor does the fact that a witness stated that “ [a]s far as I could gather” an overheard conversation referred to a particular matter necessarily render the testimony inadmissible. Finally, evidence of an attempt to escape during the period of confinement constitutes proof of consciousness of guilt and is admissible. We discuss these propositions in…

2Cases cited23 opinions

  1. People v. AlbertsonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1944
  2. United States v. CotterCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1932
  3. People v. BurwellCalifornia Supreme Court · 1955
  4. People v. ArnoldCalifornia Supreme Court · 1926
  5. People v. BurnsCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1948

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

3Cited by34 opinions

  1. People v. VieiraCalifornia Supreme Court · 2005
  2. People v. TewksburyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1976
  3. People v. BacigalupoCalifornia Supreme Court · 1991
  4. People v. EllisCalifornia Supreme Court · 1966
  5. United States v. JemmingsUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1976

29 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