Nonella

People v. Nonella

Good Law
1893 Cal. LEXIS 663·99 Cal. 333·33 P. 1097
Supreme Court of CaliforniaAugust 17, 1893No. 20959California910 words

Opinion

lead Opinion

Garoutte, J.

Defendant was convicted of the crime of an assault with intent to commit murder, and appealed from the judgment and order denying his motion for a new trial.

The motion for a new trial should have been granted by reason of error committed by the court in admitting improper evidence before the jury. Mrs. Nonella, wife of the defendant, was an eye witness to the affray, and testified in behalf of her husband. Upon cross-examination she was asked the following questions, which were answered in the negative: —

Objections were made to these questions upon various grounds, which were overruled, the district attorney stating that his only object in asking them was for the purpose of laying a foundation to impeach the witness. Owing to other matters which will hereafter receive our attention, we do not find it necessary to review the rulings of the court regarding the admissibility of this evidence, especially in view of the fact that the answers were in the negative, and consequently no harm could have resulted to defendant thereby.

In rebuttal the district attorney, for the purposes of impeachment, placed the witness, Mrs. Bassi, upon the stand, and she was asked: “ What did she tell…

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.