Cordero

People v. Cordero

Good Law
1925 Cal. App. LEXIS 517·72 Cal. App. 526·237 P. 786
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMay 6, 1925Docket No. 836.California1,233 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Plummer, J.

The defendant was prosecuted for the offense denounced and made punishable by the provisions of section 288 of the Penal Code. Following the defendant’s conviction, a motion for a new trial being denied, the defendant appeals. In prosecuting this appeal, no question is tendered to the court as to the sufficiency of the evidence, if believed by the jury, to support the verdict. We have read all the testimony set forth in the transcript, and are satisfied therefrom that no question could be raised as to its sufficiency, but the nature of the testimony is such as to preclude its being set forth in this opinion.

The points relied upon for reversal relate simply to remarks made by the district attorney during the course of the examination of witnesses and in his closing address to the jury. Appellant also sets forth in his brief that certain remarks of the court were prejudicial, but as an examination of the transcript discloses no objections to the remarks made at the time, and no request made by counsel that the court instruct the jury to disregard such remarks, it is not necessary for us to set forth the remarks of the court, or to make any further comment thereon.

The testimony…

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.