From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

PEOPLE v. COX

Court of Appeal of California, Fourth District
Sep 12, 1944
65 Cal.App.2d 712 (Cal. Ct. App. 1944)

Opinion

Docket No. 627.

September 12, 1944.

APPLICATION for stay of execution of judgment of conviction pending appeal. Granted.

Swing Swing for Petitioner.

Robert W. Kenny, Attorney General, Jerome B. Kavanaugh (San Bernardino), District Attorney, and Theodore Krumm, Deputy District Attorney, for Respondent.


Defendant and appellant petitioned this court for a stay of execution of a judgment of conviction pending the determination of his appeal following the refusal of the trial court to order a stay of execution pending the appeal pursuant to section 1243 of the Penal Code.

[1] We have examined the record on appeal in which the defendant has urged the insufficiency of the evidence to justify the verdict, misconduct of the trial judge, unwarranted restriction of cross-examination, and the giving of claimed erroneous instructions. We have concluded that the grounds urged for a reversal of the judgment present debatable questions meriting extended consideration by the court and that the appeal has been taken in good faith and is not frivolous. Under these circumstances a stay of execution should be and is granted pending the final determination of the case on appeal. ( People v. Burnette, 34 Cal.App.2d 663 [94 P.2d 399]; People v. Simpson, 65 Cal.App.2d 15 [151 P.2d 738].)

Marks, J., concurred.


Summaries of

PEOPLE v. COX

Court of Appeal of California, Fourth District
Sep 12, 1944
65 Cal.App.2d 712 (Cal. Ct. App. 1944)
Case details for

PEOPLE v. COX

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE, Respondent, v. RAYMOND L. COX, Petitioner

Court:Court of Appeal of California, Fourth District

Date published: Sep 12, 1944

Citations

65 Cal.App.2d 712 (Cal. Ct. App. 1944)
151 P.2d 269

Citing Cases

People v. Sullivan

Accordingly, it cannot be said that the trial court abused its discretion or unjustifiably denied the…

People v. Shorts

The right to such an appeal would be worthless and the appellate jurisdiction of this court could not be…