People v. Abbott
Citations
- 101 Cal. 645
- 36 P. 129
- 1894 Cal. LEXIS 1092
Syllabus
<p>Criminal Law—Trial—Bribery or Witness—Investigation by Court. If the circumstances pending a criminal trial are such as to impress the court with a suspicion that a witness has heen tampered with or bribed by the attorney for the defendant, the investigation of the matter should be conducted in the absence of the jury in order that the jurors might not be influenced in their verdict by any developments arising from such investigation.</p> <p>Id.—Remarks in Presence or Jury-—Exception.—An objection to remarks made by the trial court in the presence of the jury, touching the conduct of appellant’s attorney in regard to the bribery of a witness, will not be considered upon appeal where no exception was noted to the course pursued by the court.</p> <p>Id.—Possession or Stolen Property Unexplained—Burglary.—The mere possession of stolen property unexplained by the defendant, though not sufficient to justify a conviction, is a circumstance tending to show guilt, and the accused is bound to explain the possession in order to remove the effect of it as a circumstance to be considered in connection with other suspicious facts if the evidence discloses any such.</p> <p>Id.—Inappropriate Expression—Instruction.—The words “a circumstance tending to show guilt ” would be a more appropriate expression than the phrase “a guilty circumstance” as applied to the possession of stolen property, yet their manifest meaning is the same, and the use of the latter expression in an instruction is not ground for a reversal of a judgment of conviction.</p> <p>Id.—Appropriateness of Instruction—Possession of Property—Conflict of Evidence.—Where there is direct evidence to the effect that the defendant was in possession of the property stolen from the house burglarized at about the time the burglary was committed, the mere fact that this evidence was contradicted by the defendant or other witness, cannot defeat the right of the people to have an instruction bearing upon the question of the po
Judges: Garoutte
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
10 cases in this archive cite this case.
- People v. McFarlandCalifornia Supreme Court· 1962-11-20· cited 375×
- People v. WellsCalifornia Court of Appeal· 1960-12-12· cited 38×
- People v. GolembiewskiCalifornia Court of Appeal· 1938-02-18· cited 34×
- People v. HanzCalifornia Court of Appeal· 1961-04-04· cited 19×
- People v. HollandCalifornia Court of Appeal· 1947-11-06· cited 18×
- People v. KefryCalifornia Court of Appeal· 1958-12-16· cited 17×
- State v. AllenSupreme Court of Iowa· 1896-12-09· cited 17×
- People v. KingCalifornia Court of Appeal· 1908-05-29· cited 14×
- People v. BrownCalifornia Court of Appeal· 1960-12-22· cited 9×
- People v. AlbrightCalifornia Court of Appeal· 1948-08-17· cited 4×
Cites
3 cases in this archive are cited by this case.
Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.