People v. Hardisson

Citations

• 61 Cal. 378
• 1882 Cal. LEXIS 628

Syllabus

<p>Commitment—Deposition.—Upon the examination of the defendant before the Justice the order for his confinement, provided for by Section 872 Penal Code, was indorsed upon the depositions taken at the examination and not upon the depositions accompanying the original information. Held: The order complied with the section referred to.</p> <p>Plea oe Once In Jeopardy.—Upon an appeal from a judgment of conviction for grand larceny, the judgment and order refusing a new trial were reversed on the ground that the evidence was insufficient to justify the conviction, and after the going down of the remittitur the defendant interposed a plea of once in jeopardy, such plea being based on the former conviction and reversal. Held: There is no merit in the point made by the defendant.</p> <p>Circumstantial Evidence—Reasonable Doubt.—The Court instructed the jury: “In order to convict upon circumstantial evidence, the circumstances should be such as to produce nearly the same degree of certainty as that which arises from direct testimony, and to exclude a rational probability of innocence. The circumstances ought to be of such a nature as not to he reasonably accounted for on the supposition of the defendant’s innocence, but perfectly reconcilable with the supposition of defendant’s guilt; ” and also instructed the jury that it must he satiafied from the evidence of the guilt of the defendant beyond a reasonable doubt before they could find him guilty.</p> <p>Held: There is no substantial conflict in these instructions. The instruction excepted to is sustained by People v. Cronin, 34 Cal. 191, and People v. Padillia, 42 id. 535.</p>