Tibbetts

People v. Tibbetts

Good Law
102 Cal. App. 787·1929 Cal. App. LEXIS 131·283 P. 830
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaDecember 30, 1929Docket No. 1548.California1,312 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Sturtevant, J.

The defendant was convicted of violating section 288 of the Penal Code. He made a motion for a new trial, his motion was denied, and from the judgment of conviction and the order denying a new trial he has appealed.

1. The defendant contends that the evidence was insufficient to support the verdict. In making this contention he claims that the witnesses swore falsely as to some matters and that some of the sworn statements were inherently improbable. For the purpose of this decision it may be conceded that both assertions are well founded. However, as to other matters it is equally clear that the prosecution introduced evidence which abundantly supported every allegation contained in the information.

2. It is claimed that the prosecutrix, a little girl eight years of age, should not have been allowed to testify. (Code Civ. Proc., sec. 1880, subd. 2.) The record discloses that the trial court carefully examined her as to her mental development and the record does not show that the trial court erred in its determination that she was entitled to be sworn. The point is without merit. {People v. Reyes , Cal. 650, 651 [ 229 Pac. 947 ].) ;

3. When the jury was being selected tlx ant’s…

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.