Bishop

People v. Bishop

Good Law
1889 Cal. LEXIS 993·81 Cal. 113·22 P. 477
Supreme Court of CaliforniaOctober 11, 1889No. 20515California586 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Sharpstein, J.

Appellant was tried upon a charge of assault with intent to commit murder, and found guilty of an ass.ault with a deadly weapon. He moved for a new trial, which was denied, and from the judgment and the order denying his motion for a new trial this appeal is taken.

After the defendant had been examined in chief as a witness in his own behalf, he was cross-examined by the prosecution, and during such cross-examination the following questions were put to him, and the following proceedings:^- .

The attorney-general in his brief admits that the questions asked were incompetent for the purpose of affecting the credibility of the witness, but insists that “the grounds (of the objections) that the questions were immaterial were not sufficient, for on cross-examination it is not necessary that the questions be material to the issue.”

We think the ground of the objection sufficient. Besides, the defendant’s attorney stated as the grounds of one of his objections that the question was immaterial, incompetent, and not in cross-examination.” A defendant in a criminal action or proceeding cannot be compelled to be a witness against himself; but if he offer himself as a witness he may be…

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.