People v. Marseiler
Citations
- 70 Cal. 98
- 11 P. 503
- 1886 Cal. LEXIS 733
Syllabus
<p>Criminal Law—Assault with Intent to Murder — Information. — An information for an assault with intent to murder is sufficient if it substantially complies with the requirements of sections 950-952 of the Penal Code.</p> <p>Id.—Instructions — Review of on Appeal.—Alleged errors in the instructions to the jury in a criminal case will not be considered on appeal if the instructions are not embodied in the record.</p> <p>Id. — Hearsay Evidence—Immaterial Error. —The admission in evidence of a statement by the person alleged to have been assaulted, made without the presence of the defendant and about two hours after the assault, to the effect that he was shot, without indicating by whom the shot was fired, is not prejudicial to the defendant if the latter admits when testifying in his own behalf to having fired the shot complained of:</p> <p>Id. — Error in admitting hearsay evidence of a certain fact is cured if the defendant subsequently testifies to the same effect.</p> <p>Id.—Assault with Deadly Weapon — Condition of Defendant as to Sobriety—Evidence —Intent.—Where an information charges the defendant with an assault with intent to murder, and he is convicted of an assault with a deadly weapon, the exclusion of evidence tending to show his condition as to sobriety or the contrary at the time of the assault is not error, as the offense of which the defendant was convicted does not involve the necessity of proof of any specific intent to commit it.</p> <p>Id.—Reputation of Defendant for Peace and Quiet—Rejection of Evidence of. — On the trial, the defendant’s counsel asked a witness if he knew the reputation of the defendant for peace and quietude in the community in which he lived. The district attorney objected to the question because it had not been shown that the witness knew the particular community in which the defendant lived. The court thereupon asked the witness several questions, and then sustained the objection. The record does not show what these question
Judges: Foote
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
17 cases in this archive cite this case.
- People v. HoodCalifornia Supreme Court· 1969-12-18· cited 435×
- People v. ColantuonoCalifornia Supreme Court· 1994-01-31· cited 229×
- People v. SanchezCalifornia Supreme Court· 1950-06-09· cited 75×
- People v. MathisCalifornia Supreme Court· 1965-10-01· cited 64×
- People v. CorlettCalifornia Court of Appeal· 1944-11-27· cited 42×
- People v. GordanCalifornia Supreme Court· 1894-08-17· cited 39×
- People v. Lim Dum DongCalifornia Court of Appeal· 1938-04-26· cited 34×
- State v. GoddardSupreme Court of Missouri· 1901-04-23· cited 33×
- People v. WrightCalifornia Court of Appeal· 2002-07-29· cited 28×
- People v. BrinsonCalifornia Court of Appeal· 1961-04-17· cited 19×
- People v. KetchumCalifornia Supreme Court· 1887-10-29· cited 16×
- People v. MorrowCalifornia Court of Appeal· 1969-01-21· cited 15×
- People v. PalmerCalifornia Court of Appeal· 1989-01-27· cited 10×
- People v. AvilaCalifornia Court of Appeal· 1967-08-08· cited 9×
- People v. IngramCalifornia Court of Appeal· 1949-05-19· cited 8×
- McKenzie v. Fairmont Food Co.N.D. Ohio· 1969-08-25· cited 2×
- United States v. WilsonD. Massachusetts· 1886-11-30· cited 1×
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.