From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Brown

Supreme Court of California
Apr 1, 1878
53 Cal. 66 (Cal. 1878)

Opinion

         Appeal from the County Court of Sacramento County.

         The defendant was tried for the crime of grand larceny. In the final argument of the cause, the District Attorney commented upon the fact that the defendant had not presented herself as a witness in her own behalf, and argued that the circumstance was one tending strongly to prove her guilt. The counsel for the defendant objected to such argument; but the Court permitted it, and indicated approval thereof. The defendant was convicted, and appealed.

         COUNSEL:

         J. S. Brown and J. C. Goods, for the Appellant.

         Attorney-General Hamilton, for the People.


         OPINION          By the Court:

         The Court erred in permitting the District Attorney (against the objection of defendant's counsel) to argue that the failure of defendant to become a witness was to be considered by the jury as a circumstance tending to prove her guilt, and in approving of such action of the prosecuting officer. ( Penal Code, sec. 1323; People v. Tyler , 36 Cal. 522.)

         Judgment and order reversed, and cause remanded for a new trial. Remittitur forthwith.


Summaries of

People v. Brown

Supreme Court of California
Apr 1, 1878
53 Cal. 66 (Cal. 1878)
Case details for

People v. Brown

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE v. MAGGIE BROWN

Court:Supreme Court of California

Date published: Apr 1, 1878

Citations

53 Cal. 66 (Cal. 1878)

Citing Cases

People v. Foo

It was prejudicial error for him to allude to the failure of any defendant or codefendant to testify. (…

People v. Sansome

         The failure to become a witness in his own behalf is not a circumstance to be considered by the jury…