Murray

People v. Murray

Good Law
1892 Cal. LEXIS 665·94 Cal. 212·29 P. 494
Supreme Court of CaliforniaMarch 31, 1892No. 20848California797 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Foote, J.

The defendant was tried and convicted of the crime of murder. He appealed to this court from the judgment rendered in the premises, and from an order refusing a new trial. The judgment was affirmed, but the order denying a new trial was reversed. The case is reported in 85 Cal. 350 -361, where it was said, among other things: —

“ The order denying the defendant a new trial is reversed, with instructions to the court below to vacate the same and rehear the motion, allowing the defendant to introduce the evidence excluded on the former hearing, and the people to rebut the same by other evidence, if it is desired.”

Accordingly, the motion for a new trial was again heard, and the evidence, which showed that the jury had read newspaper articles during the trial, which it is claimed had a tendency to influence their verdict, was allowed to be introduced in the defendant’s behalf.

The people then showed, over the objections of the defendant, by the jurors themselves, that the reading of those articles had not tended to or had influenced them in any way prejudicial to the defendant in rendering their verdict.

The admission of this rebutting evidence is urged by the defendant as…

Concurring Opinion

Garoutte, J.

I concur in the judgment.

De Haven, J., and Harrison, J., dissented.

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.