People v. Ahern (1892) · DecisionDepot

People v. Ahern

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

California Supreme Court Mar 3, 1892 No. No. 20862Published

AI Brief

AI-generated · verify before citing

Holding. The court affirmed the defendant's robbery conviction, finding the evidence sufficient and rejecting claims of legal error. It further held that a defendant must request an instruction on reasonable doubt if they wish for one to be given.

Issues

Whether the evidence was sufficient to support the robbery conviction.
Whether the trial court erred in failing to instruct the jury on the definition of reasonable doubt.

Disposition. Affirmed

Quotations verified verbatim against the opinion

“The evidence is sufficient to support the verdict, and we find no merit in the assignment of errors of law.”

“If the defendant desired to have the jury instructed as to the definition of reasonable doubt, it was his duty to have asked for such instruction.”

Synopsis

Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of the city and county of San Francisco, and from an order denying a new trial.

The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.

The Court. Defendant was convicted of the crime of robbery, and appeals from the judgment and order denying his motion for a new trial.

The evidence is sufficient to support the verdict, and we find no merit in the assignment of errors of law. If the defendant desired to have the jury instructed as to the definition of reasonable doubt, it was his duty to have asked for such instruction. (People v. Christensen, 85 Cal. 571.)

Let the judgment and order be affirmed.

People v. Ahern

AI Brief

Synopsis

More from California Supreme Court

Related research

AI Brief