Skip to main content
· 12/11/1897

People v. Hubert

Citations

  • 119 Cal. 216
  • 51 P. 329
  • 1897 Cal. LEXIS 882

Syllabus

<p>Criminal Law—Homicide—Partial Insanity—Insane Delusions—Medical Opinions—Matters op Pact—Instructions.—Matters of medical science and medical opinions bearing upon the question of partial insanity are to be proved as matters of fact, and are not propositions of law, though embodied in legal treatises and judicial opinions, and it is error to instruct upon them as matter of law, or to instruct the jury that if the defendant entertained certain special beliefs which the defense claimed constituted the delusion which impelled the defendant to commit the homicide, and they were unsound, existing only in his imagination, then they were insane delusions, as matter of law.</p> <p>In.—Rebutting Evidence—General and Partial Insanity.—Where there was evidence for the defendant tending to prove both his general and partial insanity, the prosecution may give in rebuttal as to either the testimony of acquaintances of the defendant; and in rebuttal of partial insanity the prosecution may show that the defendant was in other respects sane.</p> <p>In.—Testimony op Business Acquaintance—Foundation por Opinion-Discretion.—It is largely in the discretion of the court to determine whether the business acquaintance and conversations had by a witness with the defendant were a sufficient foundation to enable him to testify that in his opinion the defendant was sane as a business man.</p> <p>Id.—Effect of Insane Delusions, Combined with General Sanity—Insufficient Defense—Delusion as to Poison—Unjustifiable Homicide.— If the defendant had insane delusions which completely possessed him, but was sane on all other subjects, then he must be judged as though the facts with respect to which the delusions existed were real; and where these facts do not constitute a defense to the homicide, the defendant cannot be justified on account of the existence of the insane delusions; and an insane delusion of a defendant accused of the murder of his wife, that she had put poison in his food, of which

Judges: Temple

Read full opinion on CourtListener

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.