People v. Hartman (1881) · DecisionDepot

People v. Hartman

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

California Supreme Court Aug 12, 1881 No. No. 10,535Published

AI Brief

AI-generated · verify before citing

Holding. The trial court erred by admitting evidence of other crimes committed by the defendant that were not described in the indictment.

Issues

Whether evidence of other stolen property, not described in the indictment, is admissible in a trial for grand larceny.

Disposition. Reversed

Quotations verified verbatim against the opinion

“the District Attorney was permitted, against the objection of defendant, to introduce evidence tending to show that the defendant had at another time stolen other property than that described in the indictment. This was error.”

Synopsis

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

The Court : The appellant was indicted for the crime of grand larceny, and on the trial the District Attorney was permitted, against the objection of defendant, to introduce evidence tending to show that the defendant had at another time stolen other property than that described in the indictment. This was error. (Walker v. Commonwealth, 1 Leigh, 574; State v. Daubert, 42 Mo. 242; State v. Goetz, 34 Mo. 85.)

Judgment and order reversed.

People v. Hartman

AI Brief

Synopsis

More from California Supreme Court

Related research

AI Brief