Ex parte Palmer

Good Law
1890 Cal. LEXIS 1081·86 Cal. 631·25 P. 130
Supreme Court of CaliforniaDecember 9, 1890No. 20765California357 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Beatty, J.

— The petitioner was held to answer by a justice of the peace of Sacramento on a charge of embezzlement, alleged to have been committed in that county. He asks to be discharged from custody upon the ground that he was committed without reasonable or probable cause (Pol. Code, sec. 1487), claiming that there was no evidence that he was guilty of the crimé charged, or of any crime, and especially that there was a total failure of evidence that he had committed any offense in Sacramento County.

We think, however, that the evidence is sufficient to make out a prima facie case, and to justify the holding of the petitioner to answer before the Superior Court of Sacramento. It appears that he was superintendent of a ranch in Yolo County; that the owner of the ranch resided in San Francisco; that monthly reports of receipts and disbursements on the ranch were made by the petitioner to the owner, and books were kept on the ranch by a book-keeper, under the direction of the petitioner, in which it was his duty to preserve an accurate account of all receipts and disbursements.

This being the case, petitioner, about a year before his arrest, sent some horses from the ranch, the property of…

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.