People v. Gee Gong

The petition for rehearing is denied. We deem- it proper to say, however, that we do not approve of the criticism by the district court of appeal of the instruction referred to in its opinion.

[EDITORS' NOTE: THIS PAGE CONTAINS HEADNOTES. HEADNOTES ARE NOT AN OFFICIAL PRODUCT OF THE COURT, THEREFORE THEY ARE NOT DISPLAYED.] *Page 30 The defendant was charged by the indictment with the crime of murder, for which crime he was tried, and found guilty of murder in the second degree. He prosecutes this appeal from the judgment and the order denying his motion for a new trial. We have carefully examined the evidence, and find it sufficient to sustain the verdict. A motion was made to set aside the indictment upon the ground that the name of David Jones, who was sworn to act as an interpreter, was not appended at the foot of the indictment. The Penal Code (sec. 995) provides that an indictment must be set aside "when the names of the witnesses examined before the grand jury, or whose depositions have been read before them, are not inserted at the foot of the indictment or indorsed thereon." It is not claimed that Jones was a witness who was examined before the grand jury as to any fact, or that his testimony was taken before the grand jury. It is true that he was sworn to act as an interpreter; but this was in the nature of an officer or specialist selected and appointed to…

The defendant was charged by the indictment with the crime of murder, for which crime he was tried, and found guilty of murder in the second degree. He prosecutes this appeal from the judgment and the order denying his motion for a new trial.

We have carefully examined the evidence, and find it sufficient to sustain the verdict.

A motion was made to set aside the indictment upon the ground that the name of David Jones, who was sworn to act as an interpreter, was not appended at the foot of .the indictment. The Penal Code (sec.. 995) provides that an indictment must be set aside “when the names of the witnesses examined before the grand jury, or whose depositions have been read before them, are not inserted at the foot of the indictment or indorsed thereon.”

It is not claimed that Jones was a witness who was examined before the grand jury as to any fact, or that his testimony was taken before the grand jury. It is true that he was sworn to act as an interpreter; but this was in the nature of an officer or specialist selected and appointed to translate the questions from English into Chinese and the answers from *31 Chinese into English; but the words “witnesses examined before…