From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Jackson

Court of Appeal of California, Second District, Division One
Mar 20, 1929
97 Cal.App. 692 (Cal. Ct. App. 1929)

Opinion

Docket No. 1765.

March 20, 1929.

APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of San Diego County. Shelley J. Higgins, Judge. Affirmed.

The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.

Whelan, Whelan Smith for Appellant.

U.S. Webb, Attorney-General, and John D. Richer for Respondent.


The defendant was convicted of robbery. It is contended by him that the trial court erred in admitting certain hearsay evidence, that the district attorney was guilty of misconduct and that the trial court erred in refusing to give certain instructions relative to reasonable doubt.

[1] We are satisfied that there was no reversible error in the admission of evidence. ( People v. Hale, 64 Cal.App. 523 [222 P. 148].) Neither was the conduct of the district attorney such as would constitute reversible error. [2] The court, in compliance with section 1096a of the Penal Code, gave an instruction fully setting forth the definition and doctrine of reasonable doubt as contained in section 1096 of the Penal Code. The instructions asked by defendant were merely refinements or elaborations of this definition and doctrine. The refusal to give them was not prejudicial.

Judgment affirmed.

Houser, Acting P.J., and York, J., concurred.


Summaries of

People v. Jackson

Court of Appeal of California, Second District, Division One
Mar 20, 1929
97 Cal.App. 692 (Cal. Ct. App. 1929)
Case details for

People v. Jackson

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE, Respondent, v. MARSH J. JACKSON, Appellant

Court:Court of Appeal of California, Second District, Division One

Date published: Mar 20, 1929

Citations

97 Cal.App. 692 (Cal. Ct. App. 1929)
276 P. 156

Citing Cases

People v. Scobey

The instructions given have oftentimes, in substance, been approved following attacks similar to those here…