People v. Johnson

—We have previously filed an unpublished opinion affirming a judgment convicting appellant of second degree murder and assault with a deadly weapon, Appellant’s petition for hearing in the Supreme Court was granted and its order retransferring the ease to this court requires consideration of appellant’s “contention that the prosecutor was guilty of improper conduct when, in three instances, he failed to offer proof of facts he asserted in cross-examining defendant, which assertions defendant denied.”

Concededly it is improper to ask questions which clearly suggest the existence of facts in the absence of a good faith belief that the question would be answered in the affirmative, or a belief that the facts could be proved, and a purpose to prove them, if their existence be denied. (People v. Lo Cigno, 193 Cal.App.2d 360, 388 [ 14 Cal.Rptr. 354 ].)

The ‘‘ three instances ’ ’ referred to follow:

Incident One—Knife fight on February 10, 1965.

Incident Two—Beating up a liquor store clerk.

Incident Three—Calling Jerry Williams a nigger.

In Lo Cigno, supra, the assertive fact cross-examination was on vital and decisive evidence intrinsically connected with the actual perpetration…