In Re Moore

Good Law
1928 Cal. App. LEXIS 848·93 Cal. App. 488·269 P. 664
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaAugust 10, 1928Docket No. 1709.California372 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Craig, J.

The following statement of facts will be taken as a basis for the decision: The trial of a case entitled People v. Albori was in progress. The petitioner herein was called as a witness and was sworn to testify. As his examination progressed he refused to answer some of the questions upon the ground that to do so might tend to incriminate him. Upon such objection being made to answering certain, of the questions, the court informed the witness that he need not answer; as to others the court directed that an answer be given. The witness in each instance complied with the ruling thus made. Finally the examination proceeded as follows:

Whereupon the court said:

We think the court was in error. The gist of the contempt is the contumacious intent as well as the conduct of the party. The procedure which it had followed justified the witness in believing that upon his refusal to answer any question on the ground stated by him the court would rule as to whether or not he must answer, and that this opportunity would be given for compliance with the court’s order before he would be adjudged guilty of contempt for refusing.

Again, we think the witness was well within his rights in refusing…

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.