People v. Young

Criminal Law—Homicide — Motion to Set aside Information.—A motion to set aside an information against a defendant accused of murder, upon the ground that he had not been committed by a magistrate, upon an affidavit to the effect that he was a native of Germany and had a very limited knowledge of the English language, and did not know that he had a right to counsel at the preliminary examination, and did not hear or understand the magistrate to inform him that he had such right, is properly overruled, where it appears from the record of the proceedings of the preliminary examination that the defendant was fully informed of his rights, and stated to the committing magistrate that he desired no counsel and was then ready to have the examination proceed, and the answers of the defendant to the interrogatories put to him by the magistrate indicate a full comprehension on his part of the proceedings before the magistrate.

Id.—Application for Interpreter—Discretion. —Under section 1884 of the Code of Civil Procedure the court is vested with a discretion in granting or refusing an application of the defendant for an interpreter.

Id.—Defense of Insanity—Refusal of Commission to Take Testimony —Admission of Facts by Prosecution—Rejection of Defendant’s Belief.-—It is not error for the court to refuse to issue a commission to . take testimony of witnesses residing in Germany, upon application of a defendant accused of murder, proposing to show by the testimony of the witnesses “that the father of the defendant was insane, was confined in an asylum and died insane; that his sister was subject to epileptic fits and died insane, and that the defendant is subject to epileptic fits, and that he believes that the witnesses will testify that from their knowledge of him, his conduct, his conversation with them, and observation of his conduct, that they believe and are of the opinion that he, defendant, is of unsound mind,” where the prosecution admitted the facts that the defendant desired to prove as to the mental condition of his father and sister; and, it appearing by the record that the appellant had been a resident of the state of California for seven years immediately prior to the trial, and had been afflicted with but one epileptic fit in this state, the court was justified in rejecting his belief as to what the witnesses would testify as to their opinion of his insanity, many years prior to the trial.

Id.—Challenge to Panel of Trial Jurors—Names not Upon Assessment-roll.—The fact that the names of 'two of the trial jurors summoned upon the panel were not found upon the assessment-roll for the preceding year, and were excused by the court for that cause, does not invalidate the panel or afford ground for a challenge to the panel.

Id.—Uncertified List of Trial Jurors—Proof of Identity.—Where the county clerk and the clerk of the board of supervisors are the same, the fact that the list of trial jurors, as provided in section 208 of the Code of Civil Procedure, was not certified when filed with the county clerk, is not ground for a challenge to the panel, it appearing that the list of trial jurors was regularly drawn under the order of the court, and the county clerk testified as to the identity of the list at the time of the challenge, and that he was then and there ready to attach to the list the certificate required by the statute.