Sears

People v. Sears

Good Law
119 Cal. 267·1897 Cal. LEXIS 891·51 P. 325
Supreme Court of CaliforniaDecember 14, 1897Crim. No. 311California1,492 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Searls, J.

The defendant was informed against for burglary alleged to have been committed in the county of Los Angeles December 4, 1896, by unlawfully, feloniously, and burglariously entering the house, room, and building of one Louisa Mas-sett, with intent then and there to commit the crime of larceny.

Upon his plea of “not guilty” a trial was had and a verdict returned of guilty of burglary in the first degree, upon which verdict defendant' was sentenced to imprisonment in the state prison at Folsom for a term of five years. Defendant appeals from the judgment and from an order denying his motion for a new trial.

The first point made for reversal is based upon the ruling of the court permitting an answer to the following question propounded to Peter McIntyre by the prosecution: “Q. Do you know whether the defendant had any trunks around that Dutchman’s place over there, or around his own place?” The objection was that the question was “incompetent, irrelevant, and immaterial.”

*269 The answer to the question was: “I saw Mr. Steele [one of the arresting officers] had a trunk in the patrol wagon, loaded up, that I think he took out of the Dutchman’s place from that old sack barn.”

In…

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.