People v. Sing Lee

The defendant was found guilty by a jury of the crime of receiving stolen goods, as defined in the statute. The appeal is by the people from an order granting the defendant a new trial. The grounds of the ruling were:— “That there was a misconduct on the part of the district attorney in asking the defendant when a witness in his own behalf upon cross-examination of said defendant the following question:

The case, we think, is similar in principle to that of People v. Valliere, 127 Cal. 66 , where the judgment and order denying the defendant a new trial were reversed for language of the district attorney to the jury substantially similar to the language used here. In that case, the defendant being on trial for larceny, the district attorney told the jury, in effect, that there was another theft committed by the defendant “that [he knew] of his own knowledge.” Here the jury was told by the district attorney, in effect, that he believed the evidence showed that the defendant was keeping a place for the habitual reception of stolen goods. This—though the contrary is urged—was something quite different from the charge on which the defendant was tried; and it may be said of it, as was…