People v. Cohen

California Court of Appeal Aug 18, 1933 No. Docket No. 1738.Published

AI Brief

AI-generated · verify before citing

Holding. The court affirmed the defendant's conviction and the order denying a new trial because the appellant failed to file a brief or appear for oral argument after the time granted for such purposes expired.

Issues

Whether the judgment and order denying a new trial should be affirmed when the appellant fails to file a brief or appear for oral argument.

Disposition. Affirmed

Quotations verified verbatim against the opinion

“Pursuant to the provisions of section 1253 of the Penal Code the judgment and the order denying a new trial are affirmed.”

THE COURT.

The defendant was convicted in the Superior Court in the City and County of San Francisco of a felony, to wit, conspiracy to cheat and defraud as defined by section 182 of the Penal Code.

[1] Judgment on the verdict was entered April 5, 1933. The transcript on appeal was filed April 13, 1933, and the cause was regularly placed on the calendar for oral argument on June 12, 1933. No appearance was made for appellant at the time the cause was called for hearing other than a request for additional time to file a brief. No brief has been *Page 758 filed in his behalf and the time granted for that purpose has long since expired.

Pursuant to the provisions of section 1253 of the Penal Code the judgment and the order denying a new trial are affirmed.

People v. Cohen

AI Brief

THE COURT.

More from California Court of Appeal

Related research

AI Brief