People v. Lopez (1881) · DecisionDepot

People v. Lopez

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

California Supreme Court Jul 15, 1881 No. No. 10,633Published

Before: McKinstry

AI Brief

AI-generated · verify before citing

Holding. The court affirmed the judgment, ruling that the challenge to the jury panel was properly disallowed, the defendant could not object to instructions he requested, and evidence of other stolen property found in the defendant's possession was admissible.

Issues

Whether the challenge to the jury panel was properly disallowed.
Whether the defendant may object to jury instructions he requested.
Whether evidence of other stolen horses found in the defendant's possession was admissible.

Disposition. Affirmed

Quotations verified verbatim against the opinion

“The challenge to the panel was properly disallowed.”

“All the instructions given were given in the exact language requested by the defendant, who can not now object to any of them.”

“Defendant’s objection to such evidence was properly overruled.”

Synopsis

Appeal from a judgment of conviction and from an order denying a new trial in the Superior Court of Monterey County. Alexander, J.

The order for a special venire was made January 5,1881. At the time of making this order, there were in the jury box about two hundred names of persons duly selected by the Board of Supervisors for the year 1880. January 24, 1881, an order was made by the Court, designating the number of grand and trial jurors, and the Board of Supervisors had not met after the making of said order, and no jurors had been selected by the Board to serve for the year 1881. The first regular meeting of the Board of Supervisors for the year 1881, was fixed by law to take place on the first Monday of February, 1881.

McKinstry, J.: The challenge to the panel was properly disallowed. (C. C. P., §§ 226, 227.)

' All the instructions given were given in the exact language requested by the defendant, who can not now object to any of them.

There was evidence tending to prove that other horses disappeared from the same neighborhood at the same time as the mare and colt, with the larceny of which defendant was charged, and tending to show that the others were found, with the mare and colt, in the possession of defendant. Defendant’s objection to such evidence was properly overruled. (People v. Robles, 34 Cal. 591.)

Judgment and order affirmed.

Ross and McKee, JJ., concurred.

People v. Lopez

AI Brief

Synopsis

More from California Supreme Court

Related research

AI Brief