Rose

People v. Rose

Good Law
119 Cal. App. 487·1932 Cal. App. LEXIS 191·6 P.2d 963
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJanuary 2, 1932Docket No. 1643.California697 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Appellant was accused by information of the crime of contributing to the delinquency of a minor. He was tried and convicted and sentenced to the county jail for a period of six months. Motion for a new trial was made and denied. This is an appeal from the judgment and order.

In support of the appeal it is first claimed that the trial court committed error in allowing certain persons to sit as jurors. It appears from the record that several of the jurors had performed jury duty the previous year. Appellant claims that, under the provisions of section 199 of the Code of Civil Procedure, they were incompetent to act. There is nothing in the record to show that any of the jurors had been finally discharged from service in criminal cases within a year. In the absence of such proof it must be presumed that the jurors impaneled were regularly upon the panel and were neither exempted nor disqualified from acting. (People v. Gilmore, 17 Cal. App. 737 [ 121 Pac. 697 ].)

It is next claimed that the court erred in permitting a certain person to testify as a handwriting expert. It appeared in evidence that appellant, in company with the prosecuting witness, a woman eighteen years of age,…

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.