Curran

People v. Curran

Good Law
1892 Cal. LEXIS 1040·3 Cal. Unrep. 643·31 P. 1116
Supreme Court of CaliforniaNovember 28, 1892No. 20,927California1,094 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Paterson, J.

The defendant Curran and one Fitzpatrick were charged jointly with the crime of grand larceny. Separate trials were demanded. The defendant Curran was tried and convicted, and from the judgment and an order denying his motion for a new trial he has appealed. We have carefully examined the evidence set forth in the bill of exceptions, and find nothing therein which sustains the verdict. It is not a case of conflict of evidence. The testimony tends to show that Fitzpatrick and another stole twenty-nine sacks of wheat and stored it in a cabin belonging to the defendant Curran. There is not a scintilla of evidence which connects the defendant with Fitzpatrick, or the person who assisted him in stealing the wheat. It is not shown even that he had any acquaintance with either one of them. The wheat was stolen on the evening of the 18th of July, 1891, and placed in the cabin of the defendant. The following is a summary of all the evidence in the case: Watson testified that on July 19th he missed twenty-nine sacks from the pile of grain, and discovered the tracks of a spring-wagon which had been drawn by two mules from Fitzpatrick’s place to the stone cabin; that Curran was hauling wheat…

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.