Tognola

People v. Tognola

Good Law
1927 Cal. App. LEXIS 638·83 Cal. App. 34·256 P. 455
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMay 11, 1927Docket No. 968.California1,591 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Thompson, J.

The defendant was charged jointly with one Heber Norton with the crime of robbery alleged to have been committed by forcibly taking from the person of one Lala Singh the sum of $10. Norton pleaded guilty. Upon trial evidence most persuasive of defendant’s guilt was adduced, upon which the jury rendered the following verdict: “We, the jury . . . find the defendant William Tognola guilty of robbery in the first degree, as charged in the information.”

Defendant claims: 1. That the verdict is inconsistent and void for uncertainty; 2. That it is the result of prejudice on the part of the jury, created by the employment of opprobrious language with reference to the defendant, used by the prosecuting attorney in the course of his argument to the jury; and 3. Error on the part of the trial court in sustaining an objection to an impeaching question asked by the defendant on cross-examination.

The evidence satisfactorily shows that about 8 o’clock on the night of November 14, 1926, this defendant and his confederate Norton, armed with a loaded revolver, which belonged to this defendant, went down, by prearrangement, to the locality of First and B Streets in Marysville, which was 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.