Vidal

People v. Vidal

Good Law
121 Cal. 221·1898 Cal. LEXIS 879·53 P. 558
Supreme Court of CaliforniaJune 16, 1898Crim. No. 343California672 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Henshaw, J.

The defendant, convicted of grand larceny, appeals from the judgment and from the order denying him a new trial.

It is first contended that, as matter of law, the evidence on behalf of the people is insufficient to sustain the verdict and judgment, for that defendant was convicted upon the uncorroborated circumstance that he was found in the possession of a mare recently stolen. (People v. Swinford, 57 Cal. 86 ; People v. Velarde, 59 Cal. 463 .) The testimony tended to show that the-stolen animal was the property of George Walker; that she, with other animals, was running in an inclosed pasture; that her owner had seen her on August 30th or 31st. On September 1st she-was gone. The gate of the pasture was locked, but it could be opened by lifting it from its socket and swinging it out *222 ward. The defendant was arrested at Santa Margarita, at 10 o’clock of the night of September 2d. Santa Margarita is about thirty miles from the place where the mare was stolen. Defendant was driving her harnessed to a buggy, and leading another horse. When arrested he spoke of the horses as his own, asked what was going to be done with “his rig,” declared that it had been his intention to take…

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.