Skip to main content

People v. Lewis

Citations

  • 124 Cal. 551
  • 57 P. 470
  • 1899 Cal. LEXIS 1034

Syllabus

<p>Criminal Law—Homicide—Manslaughter—Appeal—Conflicting Etc- ' dence. — Upon appeal from a conviction of manslaughter, where the evidence conflicts, and there is evidence sufficient to sustain, the verdict, the right and province of the jury to determine the credibility of the witnesses and to discredit evidence for the defendant contradictory to that for the prosecution, cannot be questioned in this court.</p> <p>Id.—Refusal to Advise Jury to Acquit—Exception—Review took Appeal.—No exception is authorized to a refusal of the court at the request of the defendant to advise the jury to acquit the defendant; and a review of such refusal can go no further than to determine Whether there was an absence of any substantial evidence as to some fact that the prosecution was hound to prove.</p> <p>Id.—Permission to Supply Defect.—Where the defendant does noli submit the case at the close of the evidence for the prosecution, the court may properly allow the prosecution, on just terms, to supply a defect in its evidence at any time before the final submission of the case.</p> <p>Id.—Contributory Killing—Acceleration of Death by Self-inflicted Wound.—Where the jury were authorized to find from the evidence that a gunshot wound fired by the defendant upon the deceased, was mortal, and that it contributed to his death, the fact that the deceased inflicted upon himself thereafter a knife wound in his throat, which was also mortal, and which accelerated his death, cannot relieve the defendant of responsibility for the death.</p> <p>Id.—Opening Statement of Prosecuting Attorney.—An opening statement of the prosecuting attorney that he expected to prove that the defendant himself did the cutting of the throat of the deceased, which may have been made in good faith, and with the intent to attempt its proof, does not amount to misconduct to the prejudice of the defendant, where no such proof was presented; hut the proposal and failure of such proof rather tended to weaken the case for

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

  • “[AUthough a man cannot be killed twice, two persons, acting independently, may contribute to his death] ' ‘ and each be guilty of a homicide.[I]f he - is dying from a wound given by another, both may properly be said to have contributed to his death.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Temple

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

40 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Cites

3 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

Other cases with this name

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.