Mirandi

People v. Mirandi

Good Law
1918 Cal. App. LEXIS 91·38 Cal. App. 178·175 P. 653
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaSeptember 10, 1918Crim. No. 606.California624 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Conret, J.

Defendant was convicted of the crime of misdemeanor committed by willfully and unlawfully maintaining and carrying on a place in the county of San Bernardino where intoxicating liquors were sold, etc., contrary to an ordinance of that county. The defendant appeals from the judgment.

At the trial the defendant was sworn as a witness in her own behalf, but did not testify concerning any illegal sales of liquor at .the winery, which was owned by her and conducted by her son-in-law, one Jean Pages. In the course of his address to the jury, the district attorney made the following statement: “I wish to call your attention to a remarkable thing. The defendant was placed upon the stand, but she was not asked regarding any illegal sales of liquor. Mr. Hannon did not ask her a question concerning this matter. He was too good a lawyer, and I give him credit for having too much respect for his client’s feelings than to have placed her in an embarrassing position by asking her such questions.” Defendant’s attorney thereupon objected to the statement so made, and asked the court to instruct the jury that it was not incumbent upon the defendant to make any denial of- anything pertaining to the…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.