People v. Boscovitch

California Supreme Court

People v. Boscovitch

20 Cal. 436, 1862 Cal. LEXIS 60

California Supreme Court·Decided July 1, 1862·Published·Cited by 16 cases

Opinion

Field, C. J. delivered the opinion of the Court—Cope, J. and Norton, J. concurring.

The Attorney General very properly confesses error in the present case. If the witnesses offered disregarded the rule of the Court excluding their presence, until called, during the progress of the trial, the Court might have punished them as for a contempt. The fact constituted no ground for the exclusion of their testimony. The defendant could not enforce the rule, and to deprive him of the benefit of their testimony for its disobedience, without fault on his part, was manifestly unjust and illegal.

Judgment reversed and cause remanded for a new trial.

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

Field, C. J. delivered the opinion of the Court—Cope, J. and Norton, J. concurring.

The Attorney General very properly confesses error in the present case. If the witnesses offered disregarded the rule of the Court excluding their presence, until called, during the progress of the trial, the Court might have punished them as for a contempt. The fact constituted no ground for the exclusion of their testimony. The defendant could not enforce the rule, and to deprive him of the benefit of their testimony for its disobedience, without fault on his part, was manifestly unjust and illegal.

Judgment reversed and cause remanded for a new trial.

People v. Boscovitch, 20 Cal. 436, 1862 Cal. LEXIS 60 (Cal. 1862).

Pincite

20 Cal. 436 (People v. Boscovitch) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related