From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Bangeneaur

Supreme Court of California
Jan 1, 1871
40 Cal. 613 (Cal. 1871)

Opinion

         Appeal from the Municipal Criminal Court of the City and County of San Francisco.

         COUNSEL

          Geo. W. Tyler, for Appellant.

          Jo Hamilton, Attorney-General, for Respondent.


         JUDGES: Temple, J., delivered the opinion of the Court, Rhodes, C. J., Wallace, J., and Crockett, J., concurring.

         OPINION

          TEMPLE, Judge

         The defendant was convicted of the crime of burglary. At the time he was called up for sentence, for some reason which does not appear, the District Attorney asked that the verdict be set aside and a new trial granted. The motion was sustained against the objection of the defendant, who, feeling aggrieved, has appealed to this Court from the order.

         The statute only authorizes the Court to grant a new trial upon application of the defendant.

         The order is, therefore, erroneous and must be reversed. So ordered.


Summaries of

People v. Bangeneaur

Supreme Court of California
Jan 1, 1871
40 Cal. 613 (Cal. 1871)
Case details for

People v. Bangeneaur

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA v. JOHN BANGENEAUR

Court:Supreme Court of California

Date published: Jan 1, 1871

Citations

40 Cal. 613 (Cal. 1871)

Citing Cases

People v. Thompson

It may not be initiated by the court upon its own motion. (Pen. Code, § 1181; People v. Skoff (1933) 131…

People v. Skoff

Section 1181 of the Penal Code reads in part: "When a verdict has been rendered against the defendant, the…