From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Lawyer

Court of Appeal of California, First District, Division Two
Sep 3, 1935
9 Cal.App.2d 69 (Cal. Ct. App. 1935)

Opinion

Docket No. 1845.

September 3, 1935.

APPEAL from an order of the Superior Court of Contra Costa County denying motion to set aside judgment. Thomas D. Johnston, Judge. Affirmed.

The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.

Walter Lawyer, in pro. per., for Appellant.

U.S. Webb, Attorney-General, and Seibert L. Sefton, Deputy Attorney-General, for Respondent.


The defendant was tried on an information charging the stealing of a cow. Following his conviction he appealed to this court and the judgment and the motion denying a new trial were both affirmed. Thereafter he made a motion in the trial court to set aside the judgment on fourteen grounds of asserted errors occurring during the trial. His motion was denied and he now appeals from that order.

[1] All the grounds assigned in the motion were matters which could have been raised on the motion for a new trial or on the appeal from the judgment. All relate to matters of alleged error, but none challenges the jurisdiction of the trial court to pronounce the judgment of conviction. No one of the grounds was sufficient to give the trial court jurisdiction to set aside that judgment. ( People v. Russell, 139 Cal.App. 417, 419 [ 34 P.2d 203], and cases there cited.)

The order is affirmed.

Sturtevant, J., and Spence, J., concurred.


Summaries of

People v. Lawyer

Court of Appeal of California, First District, Division Two
Sep 3, 1935
9 Cal.App.2d 69 (Cal. Ct. App. 1935)
Case details for

People v. Lawyer

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE, Respondent, v. WALTER LAWYER, Appellant

Court:Court of Appeal of California, First District, Division Two

Date published: Sep 3, 1935

Citations

9 Cal.App.2d 69 (Cal. Ct. App. 1935)
48 P.2d 722

Citing Cases

People v. Ward

Where the question raised could have been raised by an appeal, after the time for appeal has expired, the…

People v. Lawyer

That order was affirmed. ( People v. Lawyer, 9 Cal.App. (2d) 69 [ 48 P.2d 722].) [1] On the appeal now before…