Skip to main content

People v. Mitchell

Citations

  • 100 Cal. 328
  • 34 P. 698
  • 1893 Cal. LEXIS 791

Syllabus

<p>Criminal Law—Homicide—Circumstantial Evidence—Misconduct or Jury—Expression of Public Opinion—Presumption of Influence.—Where the evidence upon a prosecution for murder is mainly circumstantial, and the result depended upon the degree of credit properly attaching to the statements of the witnesses, and upon the exercise of careful discrimination and sound judgment by the jury, and some of the jurors during the trial repeatedly visited a resort of lewd women and profligate men kept by a woman who had lived with the defendant and who was one of his principal witnesses, and there conversed in reference to the case, and subsequently the judge of the court delivered an admonition to the jurors upon their conduct, which was published at length in a newspaper under the head of “ What Does It Mean? ” and the sheriff who was a witness for the prosecution, made remarks to the jury calculated to prevent the jury from disagreeing on account of those visits, it must be presumed that the jury were influenced by a fear of public opinion in convicting the defendant, and a verdict of conviction rendered under such circumstances should not he upheld.</p> <p>Id.—Evidence—Drill of Military Company—Order of Officer—Ill-feeling of Defendant.—Where it appeared that the deceased was a member of a military company, which had been drilling on the night of the homicide, evidence that the defendant had been ordered out of the way by the officer of the company, other than the deceased, when it was engaged in skirmish drill, is not admissible to show ill-feeling by the defendant toward the deceased.</p> <p>Id.—Proof of Commission of Crime by Third Person—Acquittal Immaterial..—Evidence is admissible on the part of a defendant tending to show that another person committed the crime, and the fact that such other person had been tried and acquitted for the same offense does not alter the case. The judgment of acquittal of such third person is not admissible in evidence upon the prosecution of th

Judges: Searls

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

19 cases in this archive cite 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.