Ford

The defendant was convicted of robbery, and appeals from the judgment and from an order denying him a new trial.

The evidence showed that the defendant, on the sixteenth day of February, 1901, in the city of San Francisco, struck a Chinaman a violent blow on the head with a short piece of iron pipe, knocked him down and took from his possession a bag containing $216 in silver, and fled from the stairway where the act was committed out through the streets to a restaurant, where he was arrested. The money was found on his person and he confessed the alleged criminal act. The facts with reference to the forcible taking of the money were not controverted by defendant upon the trial, but the sole defense made was that the defendant was insane at the time of the alleged robbery. Some time after the case was submitted to them the jury returned into court for further instructions, and in response to questions propounded by the jurors they were distinctly told by the court that “ the laws of the state of California do not recognize transitory mania or temporary insanity as a defense to crime.” And this statement was repeated in substance in a formal instruction then given by the court in…