People v. Armstrong

California Supreme Court

People v. Armstrong

44 Cal. 326, 1872 Cal. LEXIS 204

CourtCalifornia Supreme Court

DecidedJuly 1, 1872

DocketNo. 3,396

StatusPublished

Cited by5 cases

This text of 44 Cal. 326 (People v. Armstrong) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering California Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

People v. Armstrong, 44 Cal. 326, 1872 Cal. LEXIS 204 (Cal. 1872).

Pincite

Opinion

By the Court, Wallace, C. J.:

The transcript in this case, containing some six hundred pages, consists in the main of the notes of the evidence given at the trial, purporting to have been taken down by the Phonographic Reporter of the Court below, and supported by his affidavit that they are correct. As we said in People v. Woods, 43 Cal. 177, these do not constitute a statement which we are at liberty to examine, nor form part of the record here for any purpose.

Bor can we consider the points, or any of them, relied upon by the counsel for the prisoner, in the able argument with which we have been favored, for these do not appear in the record, except in the bill of exceptions, so called, which, not having been signed by the Judge, we are compelled also to disregard. (Crim. Prac. Act, Sec. 435.)

Judgment affirmed.

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

By the Court, Wallace, C. J.:

The transcript in this case, containing some six hundred pages, consists in the main of the notes of the evidence given at the trial, purporting to have been taken down by the Phonographic Reporter of the Court below, and supported by his affidavit that they are correct. As we said in People v. Woods, 43 Cal. 177, these do not constitute a statement which we are at liberty to examine, nor form part of the record here for any purpose.

Bor can we consider the points, or any of them, relied upon by the counsel for the prisoner, in the able argument with which we have been favored, for these do not appear in the record, except in the bill of exceptions, so called, which, not having been signed by the Judge, we are compelled also to disregard. (Crim. Prac. Act, Sec. 435.)

Judgment affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

44 Cal. 326, 1872 Cal. LEXIS 204, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-armstrong-cal-1872.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack