MacHuca

People v. MacHuca

Good Law
158 Cal. 62·1910 Cal. LEXIS 338·109 P. 886
Supreme Court of CaliforniaJune 21, 1910Crim. No. 1551.California1,181 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Sloss, J.

The defendant appeals from a judgment imposing upon him a sentence of death after a conviction of murder of the first degree, and from an order denying his motion for a new trial.

Appellant’s principal point is that the evidence is insufficient, in that it fails to show the premeditation which is an essential element of the first degree of the crime charged. A very brief summary of some of the testimony introduced by the People will show the contention to be without merit.

The appellant was charged with the murder of Mrs. Refuga Yorba. Mrs. Yorba, together with her son John Yarela, and other members of her family, was living in a five-room cottage. She occupied a room in the front of the cottage, and John a room in the rear. At about midnight on the eighteenth day of August, 1908, John Yarela, who had retired, was awakened by hearing his mother cry “Help, help, they are killing me.” He jumped out of bed, and taking a revolver, ran out of the liouse at the rear and around to the front. There he saw the defendant, Machuca. John Varela then walked into the house and entered his mother’s room. According to his testimony, ■“she had outs all over her and full of blood. . . . She was…

Concurring Opinion

Angellotti, J.

In concurring in the judgment I deem it proper to say that the evidence contained in the record upon which the finding as to premeditation essential to sustain a verdict of guilty of murder in the first degree must depend, is exceedingly unsatisfactory to my mind. But, as shown in the opinion, there was some substantial evidence which, if believed by the jury and trial judge, would warrant the verdict, and that being the ease an appellate court is not warranted in setting aside the verdict. The evidence opposed to the theory sustained by the verdict is, of course, not set forth in the opinion, but to my mind it is of such a nature as to render the evidence relied on by the prosecution very unsatisfactory, and to give rise to the most serious doubt of the guilt of the defendant of murder in the first degree.

Beatty, C. J., concurred.

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.