Piner

People v. Piner

Good Law
11 Cal. App. 542·1909 Cal. App. LEXIS 113·105 P. 780
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaOctober 22, 1909Crim. No. 100.California4,968 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Hart, J.

The defendant, having been convicted of the crime of grand larceny, brings the cause to this court on an appeal from the judgment and from the order refusing to grant his motion for a new trial.

The appellant claims a reversal for these reasons: 1. That the demurrer to the information should have been sustained because there are set out in the accusatory pleading two separate and distinct offenses; 2. That the court erred to his prejudice in allowing, over his objections, the testimony of the witness Robinson purporting to give a confession of guilt by the defendant, the specific contention upon this point being that said alleged confession was not voluntarily made, and, therefore, in law, was no confession at all; 3. That the court committed prejudicial error in giving certain instructions to the jury.

1. The information, in the first count thereof, charges the defendant with the crime of burglary, alleging that on the twenty-third day of August,' 1908, he burglariously entered the store of one P. Q. Robison, at Kelseyville, Lake county, with the intent, etc.

The second count of the information charges the crime of grand larceny in'the following language: “The said William A.…

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.