Pyle

People v. Pyle

Good Law
1919 Cal. App. LEXIS 472·44 Cal. App. 130·185 P. 1019
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaNovember 5, 1919Crim. No. 683.California1,133 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Thomas, J.

The information in this action is in two counts—one alleging embezzlement and the other grand larceny. The defendant was convicted of the former and acquitted as to the latter charge. There was a motion for new trial, which was denied; and thereupon the defendant was sentenced to imprisonment in the state’s prison. This appeal is from the judgment and said order denying defendant’s motion for a new trial.

Appellant urges four reasons for reversal of the judgment and order, viz.: (1) Error of the court in giving instruction “on the question of corroboration”; (2) error of the court “on the question of receiving and converting property while assuming to act for another”; (3) that there is in the record “no evidence of embezzlement, but that there is some evidence tending to prove that defendant obtained the signature of the prosecuting witness to the draft with intent to cheat and defraud him, of which defendant is not charged”; and (4) abuse of discretion by the court in refusing to grant defendant’s motion for a new trial, “for the reason that, at least, a part of the jury received extrajudicial evidence, from a source and of a nature and under circumstances which naturally would…

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.