Legal Opinion · Dissent

People v. Roehler

California Court of Appeal

Decided April 25, 1985No. Crim. 43117Published

1DissentDalsimer, J.

I respectfully dissent.

The prosecution’s case was predicated solely upon circumstantial evidence because the defendant was the only survivor and thus the only witness to what occurred on January 2, 1981. Because of the presumption of innocence afforded a defendant in a criminal case, it is required that, where the People’s case rests exclusively or even substantially upon circumstantial evidence, that evidence must be irreconcilable with any rational conclusion other than defendant’s guilt. Further, when relying on circumstantial evidence, the People must prove beyond a reasonable doubt each…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. People v. WatsonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1956
  2. People v. KellyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1976
  3. People v. CollinsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1968
  4. People v. HannonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1977
  5. Hasson v. Ford Motor Co.California Supreme Court · 1977

6 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