Murillo

People v. Murillo

Good Law
119 Cal. App. 59·1931 Cal. App. LEXIS 118·5 P.2d 897
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaDecember 7, 1931Docket No. 2122.California1,899 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Ira, J.

This is an appeal from a judgment sentencing the defendant for murder in the second degree and from an order denying her motion for a new trial.

It is a sad and, if the jury be right, a most unnatural case. The appellant is the mother of the girl she was found guilty of murdering. The following testimony was introduced and is now said to support the verdict: On December 20, 1930, the appellant went to the undertaking parlor of Enrique Cloret, in Belvedere, and informed one C. D. Ramirez that her daughter two years of age was dead, and that she wanted him to care for the body. Ramirez .asked her for the name of her doctor and was informed that she had none, whereupon Ramirez said that it would be necessary for him to notify the coroner’s office. The appellant then told Ramirez that if he could not make arrangements to care for the child not to take the body to the coroner’s; that she feared “to have the difficulties”; and that the child had died as a result of a fall from an automobile in which she (the appellant) had been taking her daughter to the hospital a week before. Jessie Plores, a witness for the People, testified that she lived in a part of the same house occupied by…

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.