Woodruff

People v. Woodruff

Good Law
1899 Cal. LEXIS 1160·6 Cal. Unrep. 346·58 P. 854
Supreme Court of CaliforniaOctober 21, 1899Cr. No. 516California1,131 words

Opinion

lead Opinion

Haynes, J.

John Woodruff was convicted of the crime of embezzlement, and appeals from the judgment and an order denying his motion for a new trial. The only ground presented for reversal is that the court erred in overruling his *347 said motion. The controverted question is the identity of the embezzler. Petterman & Son were the proprietors of a livery-stable at Long Beach. On July 8, 1897, the senior partner was absent, and the son and his younger brother, a boy of fifteen, were in charge of the stable. A man, who was not known to either of them, called, and hired a pair of horses and a spring wagon to go to Redondo. The elder brother harnessed the horses and the younger brother, assisted by the stranger, greased the wagon. These things consumed about twenty minutes, and the stranger drove away, going, not to Redondo, but to Los Angeles, where he and another man disposed of the horses, wagon and harness. No inquiry was made by the livery-keeper as to the name or residence of the hirer. The defendant was arrested on the 3d of September, at Long Beach, the defendant’s brother, Charles, being with him. The elder of the Petterman boys testified on cross-examination that the man who got 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.