From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. McDonald

Supreme Court of California
Jul 1, 1870
39 Cal. 697 (Cal. 1870)

Summary

In People v. Snellie (No. 2,959), decided at the April term, 1872, but not reported, a witness was asked if he had been arrested for larceny.

Summary of this case from People v. Manning

Opinion

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

         COUNSEL:

         Geo. W. Tyler, for Appellant.

          Jo Hamilton, Attorney General, for Respondent.


         JUDGES: Rhodes, C. J., delivered the opinion of the Court.

         OPINION

          RHODES, Judge

         On cross-examination of the defendant, who was sworn as a witness in his own behalf, the District Attorney asked the following question: " Were you not convicted and sentenced to the County Jail, for an assault on a girl about ten years of age?" to which question the defendant's counsel objected, on the ground that the testimony of the witness was not the best evidence of the conviction. The objection was overruled. The Court erred in overruling the objection. (People v. Reinhart, 39 Cal. 449.)

         Judgment reversed, and cause remanded for a new trial.


Summaries of

People v. McDonald

Supreme Court of California
Jul 1, 1870
39 Cal. 697 (Cal. 1870)

In People v. Snellie (No. 2,959), decided at the April term, 1872, but not reported, a witness was asked if he had been arrested for larceny.

Summary of this case from People v. Manning
Case details for

People v. McDonald

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA, Respondents, v. FELIX McDONALD…

Court:Supreme Court of California

Date published: Jul 1, 1870

Citations

39 Cal. 697 (Cal. 1870)

Citing Cases

People v. Sears

Prior to the adoption of the code such proof could only be made by the record. (People v. McDonald , 39 Cal.…

People v. Manning

          McElrath & Osment, for the Appellant, argued: The Court erred in allowing the witness Harris to…