Ryan

People v. Ryan

Bad Law
1890 Cal. LEXIS 613·82 Cal. 617·23 P. 121
Supreme Court of CaliforniaJanuary 29, 1890No. 20555California529 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Foote, J.

The defendant was convicted of burglary in the first degree; from the judgment rendered against him, and an order denying a motion for a new trial, he has appealed.

The error relied on to reverse the judgment and order is, that the people were allowed, over the defendant’s objection, to introduce in evidence his plea of guilty in the same cause before the same court, after, by the permission of that court, his plea of guilty had been withdrawn, and he had been permitted to enter a plea of not guilty, according to the provisions of section 1018 of the Penal Code, which contains, among other things, this language: “The court may at any time before judgment, upon a plea of guilty, permit it to be withdrawn and a plea of not guilty substituted.”

The counsel for the people in his brief contends that the admission in evidence of the former plea of guilty stands upon the same rule of law as the admission of “ confessions” of a defendant, and concludes in this language: “In this case, there could have been no conviction without the confession ” (that is, the plea of guilty).

The case stands thus, without the evidence of a withdrawn plea of guilty, for which, by authority of law and the…

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.