People v. Hall
California Supreme Court Jul 1, 1861Published
Before: Baldwin
Synopsis
An indictment for altering the brand of a horse with intent to steal it, and charging the property as that of an estafe, is bad. The indictment should charge the animal to belong to a particular individual, or that the owner of the animal is unknown.
Baldwin, J. delivered the opinion of the Court Field, C. J. concurring.
This was a case for altering the brand of a horse with intent to steal it.
[426]The indictment charges the property as that of an estate. This is insufficient. The charge should be of altering the brand of the animal as that of a particular individual, or that the owner of the animal was unknown.
For this error the judgment must be reversed and cause remanded.
More from California Supreme Court
- People v. Wende (1979)
- People v. Watson (1956)
- People v. Superior Court (Romero) (1996)
- People v. Kelly (2006)
- Auto Equity Sales, Inc. v. Superior Court (1962)
- Aguilar v. Atlantic Richfield Co. (2001)
- People v. Lewis (2021)
- In Re Estrada (1965)
- Denham v. Superior Court (1970)
- People v. Marsden (1970)