Klee

People v. Klee

Good Law
1902 Cal. LEXIS 884·6 Cal. Unrep. 957·69 P. 696
Supreme Court of CaliforniaJuly 9, 1902Cr. No. 889California2,418 words

Opinion

lead Opinion

Haynes, J.

The defendant was tried upon an information for embezzlement, was found guilty, and appeals from the judgment and the order denying a new trial.

The property alleged to have been embezzled was a gray mare, the property of one J. C. Hickey, which had been intrusted to defendant on the 18th of October, 1901, “to use and care for as a bailee.” A brief preliminary statement of facts is to the effect that the defendant was engaged in selling paper bags, twine, etc., through the country, carrying his stock in a covered delivery wagon, with one horse, and wished to get a second horse “for its keep”; that he obtained from the prosecuting witness, J. C. Hickey, in the city of Los Angeles, a gray mare, which he drove with his own horse, and at or near Saticoy, in Ventura county, traded her to one Willis for another horse, paying $25 “to boot,” and continued on northerly, intending to go to Oakland, and was detained at Niles, in Alameda county, by a constable, upon information from Los Angeles. Defendant’s contention is that he had an option to purchase the mare at a stated price, and was therefore authorized to dispose of her. The prosecuting witness, J. C. Hickey, testified that he was…

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.