McFarlane

People v. McFarlane

Good Law
134 Cal. 618·1901 Cal. LEXIS 837·66 P. 865
Supreme Court of CaliforniaNovember 30, 1901Crim. No. 819.California625 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Smith, J.

The defendant was tried upon an information charging him with murder, and convicted of manslaughter, and appeals from the judgment and from an order denying his motion for a new trial. The grounds urged for reversal are error in the exclusion of evidence and in the instructions.

On the trial, the testimony of witness Penycock, taken on preliminary examination of the defendant, was read in evidence by the prosecution, and afterwards the defendant offered to introduce the testimony given by the same witness on a former trial, for the purpose of contradicting his evidence as given on the preliminary examination, and introduced by the prosecution. The evidence offered was objected to, and the objection overruled. But the court said, in effect, on admitting it, that the testimony could not be limited to the purposes stated in the offer, and if introduced it must go to the jury for what it was worth, “just the same as if the witness . . . was called by them” (i. e., by the defendant’s attorneys). The testimony was then introduced. Afterwards the defendant offered to impeach the witness by evidence of bad character, offering numerous witnesses for that purpose, but the evidence was…

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.