Hertz

People v. Hertz

Good Law
105 Cal. 660·1895 Cal. LEXIS 698·39 P. 32
Supreme Court of CaliforniaJanuary 24, 1895No. 21152California1,192 words

Opinion

lead Opinion

Garoutte, J.

Defendants were informed against by the district attorney for the crime of receiving stolen goods. Defendant Dora Hertz demanded a separate trial, which was duly accorded her, and, being found guilty, was sentenced by the court to serve a. term of four years in the state prison located at San Quentin. This appeal is taken from the final judgment and also from the order of the court denying defendant’s motion for a new trial. It is claimed by the prosecution that defendants bought and received the goods, consisting of pants, coats, and vests, of one McClellan, and that McClellan stole these articles of clothing from one Horn-burg, a tailor. At the trial McClellan himself took the stand as a witness, and stated that he was the thief, and that he sold the goods to defendants.

We think the defendant has not had a fair trial, and the judgment of conviction must be reversed upon various grounds

1. The daughters of defendant were important witnesses in her behalf, and the court gave the following *663 instruction to the .jury, bearing upon their credibility: “In judging the credibility of witnesses I know that gentlemen of your intelligence need not be told that you are to look to the…

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.