Wickham

People v. Wickham

Good Law
113 Cal. 283·1896 Cal. LEXIS 777·48 P. 123
Supreme Court of CaliforniaJune 17, 1896Crim. No. 103California718 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Belcher, J.

This is an appeal from a judgment made and entered in the superior court of Alameda *284 county, convicting the defendant of the crime of embezzlement.

The only point made for a reversal is that the court erred in denying defendant’s motion to dismiss the prosecution upon the ground that the information against him was not filed within thirty days after he was held to answer.

The constitution provides that a party accused of crime “shall have the right to a speedy and public trial.” (Const., art. 1, sec. 13.) And the Penal Code provides:

It appears from the bill of exceptions that the defendant was examined before a committing magistrate upon a charge of embezzlement, and that an order holding him to answer before the superior court of Alameda county for the said offense was made and indorsed on the deposition by the magistrate on June 25,1895; that the complaint, depositions, etc., remained in the custody and possession of the said magistrate until August 1, 1895, when they were returned to and filed in the office ' of the clerk of said court; that the information against the defendant was filed by the district attorney on August 21, 1895, and on that day the defendant moved…

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.