People v. Arnold
Citations
- 116 Cal. 682
- 48 P. 803
- 1897 Cal. LEXIS 606
Syllabus
<p>Criminal Law—Assault with Intent' to Murder—Evidence—Known Infidelity of Wife — Justification—Rebuttal of Malice.—Upon the trial of a charge for an assault with intent to murder, committed by defendant upon the person of his wife, evidence that he bad been informed that his wife was running with other men for immoral and illicit purposes, and that at the time of the assault he supposed she was going away for some such purpose, is not admissible to justify the assault charged; and where his own testimony showed that he had been aware of such lewd conduct on her part for eighteen months, and it was not claimed or offered to be shown that defendant was acting under the influence of passion aroused by any receut information of his wife’s infidelity, such evidence is not admissible to rebut malice in the assault.</p> <p>Id.—Conviction of Assault with Deadly Weapon—Rejection of Evidence Subtantially Given—Harmless Ruling.—Where the defendant was convicted of the lesser offense of assault with a deadly weapon, of which malice is not. an essential ingredient, and evidence of his wife’s infidelity was in substantial effect placed before the jury, the rejection of other evidence of such infidelity, for the purpose of rebutting malice under a charge of assault with intent to murder is harmless.</p> <p>Id. —Charge of Prior Conviction of Felony—Confession—Evidence— Impeachment—Question as to Prior Conviction—Construction of Code—Waiver.—The purpose of section 1093 of the Civil Code, which provides that where the defendant has confessed a charge of prior conviction, the clerk in reading the indictment or information shall omit therefrom all that i*elafces to such previous conviction, is to give the defendant the benefit of withholding from the jury a knowledge of such prior conviction in cases other than those where the defendant by the conduct of his case, in becoming a witness in his own behalf, subjects himself to the same tests of credibility by impeachment or otherwise as
Judges: Fleet
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
14 cases in this archive cite this case.
- People v. SweeneyCalifornia Supreme Court· 1960-12-16· cited 187×
- People v. RothCalifornia Court of Appeal· 1964-07-20· cited 38×
- People v. ChapmanCalifornia Court of Appeal· 1947-10-17· cited 29×
- People v. LinyardCalifornia Court of Appeal· 1957-05-16· cited 20×
- People v. CorderoCalifornia Court of Appeal· 1949-06-06· cited 15×
- People v. GranilloCalifornia Court of Appeal· 1934-09-18· cited 15×
- State v. WoodsNorth Dakota Supreme Court· 1912-12-11· cited 15×
- People v. AppletonCalifornia Supreme Court· 1898-03-05· cited 14×
- State v. ArnoldMontana Supreme Court· 1929-03-18· cited 12×
- People v. McCurdyCalifornia Court of Appeal· 1958-11-28· cited 11×
- People v. WatsonCalifornia Supreme Court· 1899-07-12· cited 8×
- Ward v. Territory of ArizonaArizona Supreme Court· 1901-03-19· cited 4×
- Pueblo v. Pérez FigueroaSupreme Court of Puerto Rico· 1946-02-13· cited 4×
- People v. Pérez FigueroaSupreme Court of Puerto Rico· 1946-02-13
Cites
8 cases in this archive are cited by this case.
- People v. HickmanCalifornia Supreme Court· 1896-05-28· cited 36×
- People v. Chin Mook SowCalifornia Supreme Court· 1877-07-01· cited 33×
- People v. SansomeCalifornia Supreme Court· 1890-06-10· cited 23×
- People v. FranklinCalifornia Supreme Court· 1886-09-18· cited 19×
- People v. WheatleyCalifornia Supreme Court· 1891-02-25· cited 18×
- People v. GuidiceCalifornia Supreme Court· 1887-08-25· cited 12×
- People v. ScottCalifornia Supreme Court· 1892-03-02· cited 6×
- People v. UriasCalifornia Supreme Court· 1859-01-15· cited 3×
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.