People v. Opie

Citations

• 123 Cal. 294
• 55 P. 989
• 1899 Cal. LEXIS 1064

Syllabus

<p>Cbiaiinal Law—Gband Labceny—Stealing of Gold Oke.—An information charging the commission of grand larceny, in the stealing of gold ore of the value of five hundred dollars, is not defective, because not alleging that the ore had been severed from the earth prior to the taking. By the act of March 6, 1872 (Stats. 1871-72, p. 282), the stealing of gold ore of the value of fifty dollars and upward, though severed from the realty of another by the accused, is made grand larceny.</p> <p>Id.—Evidence—Subsequent Conduct and Declarations of Co-Conspirator— Hearsay—Distribution of Property.—Evidence as to the appearance, conduct and declarations of a co-conspirator, who is not on trial, directed toward matters occurring after the commission of the offense and not in the presence of the defendant, is inadmissible hearsay, and its admission is prejudicially erroneous. It is not rendered admissible, on the ground that the conspiracy was not yet ended, merely because it does not appear that the stolen property had been distributed between the thieves, in the absence of evidence on that subject, and of evidence that it was ever intended that it should be so distributed.</p> <p>Id.—Instructions—Expert Evidence—Valueof Ore.—Instructions as to expert evidence bearing upon the value of the ore taken, which are dangerously near the border line dividing the law from the facts, should not be given to the jury.</p>