People v. Wong Ah Ngow

Citations

• 54 Cal. 151

Syllabus

<p>Evidence—Presumption—Flight—Constitutional Law.—Flight on the part of a person accused of crime is a circumstance for the jury to consider in determining the question of Ms guilt or innocence, but it does not give rise to a legal presumption of guilt. Held, accordingly, that an instruction of the Court below, to the effect that the flight of the defendant was strong presumptive evidence of his guilt, was erroneous; because no such presumption arose as a matter of law, and the instruction was therefore “ with respect to matters of fact,” and in contravention of the Constitution.</p> <p>Instructions.—An erroneous instruction is not cured by a correct statement of the law in another part of the charge.</p>