From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Hicks

Supreme Court of California
Nov 18, 1884
66 Cal. 103 (Cal. 1884)

Opinion

         Department One

         Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of Yuba County.

         COUNSEL:

         E. A. Davis, for Appellant.

          Attorney General Marshall, for Respondent.


         JUDGES: McKee, J. Ross, J., and McKinstry, J., concurred.

         OPINION

          McKEE, Judge

          [4 P. 1094] The only point made by the appellant in this case is, that "the information fails to allege that the property taken was the property of some person other than the defendant." But the information contains this averment, viz: "That the property taken was the personal property in the possession of Frederick Schwartz, * * * and that the same was taken from the person and against the will of him, the said Schwartz." We think this is a sufficient averment that the property belonged to Schwartz, and that it was taken from him by the defendant.

         Judgment affirmed.


Summaries of

People v. Hicks

Supreme Court of California
Nov 18, 1884
66 Cal. 103 (Cal. 1884)
Case details for

People v. Hicks

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE, Respondent, v. JOHN W. HICKS, Appellant

Court:Supreme Court of California

Date published: Nov 18, 1884

Citations

66 Cal. 103 (Cal. 1884)
4 P. 1093

Citing Cases

People v. Wade

( People v. Covington, 1 Cal.2d 316, 318-320 [ 34 P.2d 1019]; People v. Dozier, 35 Cal.App.2d 49, 53-54 [ 94…

People v. Dozier

This contention seemingly rests upon the claim already made that the information fails to charge that the…