In re Stovall

California Court of Appeal

In re Stovall

136 Cal. App. 322

California Court of Appeal·Decided January 22, 1934·No. Crim. No. 2493·Published

Opinion

STEPHENS, P. J.

Petitioner was regularly bound over to the superior court for trial for pandering. He complains to this court that there was not sufficient evidence produced at the hearing to legally justify his being held for trial.

There is sufficient evidence to justify the belief that such a crime was committed in Ms residence. There is evidence of his implication and knowledge.

The writ is discharged.

Craig, J., and Archbald, J., pro tern., concurred.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

STEPHENS, P. J.

Petitioner was regularly bound over to the superior court for trial for pandering. He complains to this court that there was not sufficient evidence produced at the hearing to legally justify his being held for trial.

There is sufficient evidence to justify the belief that such a crime was committed in Ms residence. There is evidence of his implication and knowledge.

The writ is discharged.

Craig, J., and Archbald, J., pro tern., concurred.

In re Stovall, 136 Cal. App. 322 (Cal. Ct. App. 1934).

Pincite

136 Cal. App. 322 (In re Stovall) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.