Bonney

People v. Bonney

Good Law
1893 Cal. LEXIS 906·98 Cal. 278·33 P. 98
Supreme Court of CaliforniaMay 13, 189320939California1,007 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

The defendant was convicted of the crime of burglary in the second degree, and has appealed from the judgment entered against him and from an order denying his motion for a new trial.

At the trial the only witnesses for the prosecution were Joseph A. Sargent and George F. Seibert. Sargent testified that he owned a cabin in which he lived alone, and that in his absence some one entered it through a window and took and carried- away a few articles of small value; that subsequently defendant admitted to him that he and the witness Seibert entered the cabin and took and carried away the said articles. Seibert testified that he was a boy twelve years old, and in effect that he and defendant together committed the offense charged. Defendant, as a witness in his own behalf, denied that Le went into Sargent’s cabin at all, or took away any of the *279 missing articles, or broke or opened the window for the boy to go in, or knew of his going in until afterwards, and also denied that he ever told Sargent that he had been through his place. Sargent was again called as a witness in rebuttal, and among other things, testified that he did not tell the father of defendant that defendant denied…

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.