People v. McDonald (1870) · DecisionDepot

People v. McDonald

Name: California Superior Court Tentative Rulings
Creator: DecisionDepot
License: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/

California Supreme Court Jul 1, 1870 No. No. 2,493Published

Before: Rhodes

AI Brief

AI-generated · verify before citing

Holding. The court held that a defendant's testimony on cross-examination is not the best evidence of a prior conviction, and therefore an objection to such a question must be sustained.

Issues

Whether a defendant's testimony on cross-examination is admissible to prove a prior conviction over a best evidence objection.

Disposition. Reversed and remanded

Quotations verified verbatim against the opinion

“The Court erred in overruling the objection.”

“the testimony of the witness was not the best evidence of the conviction.”

Synopsis

Evidence of a Conviction to Disceedit a Witness.—In order to discredit a witness by showing Ms conviction of an offense, the best evidence of the conviction is requisite.

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

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 [698]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.

People v. McDonald

AI Brief

Synopsis

More from California Supreme Court

Related research

AI Brief