Introducing ATLASLearn more
Legal Opinion

People v. Cohen

California Court of Appeal

Decided April 8, 1931No. Docket No. 2044PublishedCited by 8 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

BISHOP, J., pro tem.

We are of the opinion that the judgments and the order denying a motion for a new trial should be affirmed. Appellant was charged in four counts with having, forged and passed as many checks. His first contention is that an information based upon section 470 of the Penal Code is insufficient to support a conviction where it appears that the drawer of the forged instrument is a fictitious character. Since the amendment of 1905 to section 470, this contention is no longer tenable. (People v. Gayle, (1927) 202 Cal. 159 [259 Pac. 750], citing People v. Whitaker, (1924) 68 Cal.…

2Cases cited13 opinions

  1. People v. EppingerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1894
  2. People v. SieberCalifornia Supreme Court · 1927
  3. People v. GayleCalifornia Supreme Court · 1927
  4. People v. ThalCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1923
  5. People v. ClarkCalifornia Supreme Court · 1895

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

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. State v. BrownIdaho Supreme Court · 1933
  2. People v. BoydenCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1960
  3. People v. SheridanCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1934
  4. People v. MenneCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1935
  5. People v. GutkowskyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1963

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

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

View API DocsGet API Key

Powered by the Exa API