Rubbattino

People v. Rubbattino

Good Law
64 Cal. App. 651·222 P.2d 188
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaDecember 5, 1923Crim. No. 733.California919 words

Opinion

lead Opinion

Finch, J.

By separate counts in the information the defendant was charged with three unlawful sales of intoxicating liquor. He was convicted on all of the three counts and his motion for a new trial was denied. This appeal is from the judgment and the order denying a new trial. The appeal is submitted upon the appellant’s opening brief, filed after the cause was called for oral argument.

Appellant contends that the court “committed prejudicial error in placing the jury in the custody of the sheriff and his deputy after said sheriff had been disqualified in the case.” The record does not show that the jurors were placed in charge of the sheriff or his deputy. All that ap pears in that connection is the following, taken from the clerk’s and the reporter’s transcripts, respectively: “The court now reads its instructions to the jury and the jury now retire in charge of two sworn officers.” “The clerk swears two officers to take charge of the jury, and the jury then retires to deliberate.”

During the impanelment of the jury the sheriff, on the order of the court, summoned ten persons as a special venire. The clerk’s transcript contains the following record of proceedings when these ten persons…

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.