In re Jacobs (1917) · DecisionDepot

In re Jacobs

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

California Supreme Court Aug 1, 1917 No. Crim. No. 2103Published

AI Brief

AI-generated · verify before citing

Holding. The court held that a challenge to the sufficiency of evidence supporting a criminal conviction cannot be raised through a petition for habeas corpus, as the proper remedy is an appeal.

Issues

Whether the sufficiency of evidence to warrant a conviction can be considered on habeas corpus.
Whether Penal Code section 1487, subdivision 7, permits discharge on habeas corpus for insufficient evidence after a conviction.

Disposition. Denied

Quotations verified verbatim against the opinion

“The question of insufficiency of evidence to warrant conviction cannot be considered on habeas corpus.”

“If the evidence adduced on the trial was not sufficient to show the guilt of the prisoner of that charge, his remedy was by appeal.”

Synopsis

Habeas 'Corpus—Insuppiciency op Evidence—Review.—The insufficiency of the evidence to warrant a conviction cannot be considered on habeas corpus.

Id.—Commitment Without Probable Cause — Discharge — Applicability op Code Provision.—Subdivision 7 of section 1487 of the Penal Code, authorizing a discharge on habeas corpus where a party has been committed on a “criminal charge without reasonable or probable cause, is applicable only where a person has been committed for trial by a magistrate without reasonable or probable cause.

Id.—Petit Larceny— Sufficiency of Complaint.—Where a complaint in the police court sufficiently stated fact's constituting the oflense of petit larceny, the words “by trick and device” do not impair it's sufficiency.

Id.—Insufficiency of Evidence—Remedy by Appeal.—In a prosecution for petit larceny, if the evidence is not sufficient to show the guilt of the defendant, the remedy is by appeal, and not by habeas corpus.

THE COURT. No good cause for the issuance of a writ

appears. The question of insufficiency of evidence to warrant conviction cannot be considered on habeas corpus. Subdivision 7 of section 1487 of the Penal Code, authorizing a discharge on habeas corpus “where a party has been committed on a criminal charge without reasonable or probable cause, ’ ’ is applicable only where, a person has been committed for trial by a magistrate without reasonable or probable cause. The complaint in the police court sufficiently stated facts constituting the offense of petit larceny (Pen. Code, secs. 484 and 488). The words “by trick and device” do not impair their effect in this regard. The judgment shows a conviction of the crime of petit larceny. If the evidence adduced on the trial was not sufficient to show the guilt of the prisoner of that charge, his remedy was by appeal.

The application for a writ of habeas corpus is denied.

In re Jacobs

AI Brief

Synopsis

More from California Supreme Court

Related research

AI Brief