Mullings
People v. Mullings
Opinion
Lead Opinion
McFarland, J.
J. — Defendant was charged with the murder of one John S. Moore. He was convicted, and sentenced to the state prison. He appeals from the judgment, and from an order denying him a new trial.
Defendant went upon the stand as a witness in his own behalf. After a denial that he had made one or two statements testified to by one or two of the witnesses for the prosecution, his testimony consisted simply of the following question and answer: “Q. Did you, or did you not, kill John Moore? A. No.” Upon cross-examination the prosecution asked him a great variety of questions, against the objections of his attorney that they were not proper cross-examination of a defendant under section 1323 of the Penal Code; that is, that they were not as to “matters about which he was examined in chief.” The cross-examination in this respect certainly went, at least, to the very verge of error; a place where prosecuting officers seem frequently to want to go on all doubtful questions. But, considering the general nature of defend *140 ant’s statement, this court (at least a majority of it) is not prepared to say that. error was committed on the sole ground that the questions asked were not proper…