People v. Cuintano

15 Cal. 327
CourtCalifornia Supreme Court
DecidedJuly 1, 1860
StatusPublished
Cited by2 cases

This text of 15 Cal. 327 (People v. Cuintano) 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. Cuintano, 15 Cal. 327 (Cal. 1860).

Opinion

Baldwin, J. delivered the opinion of the Court

Cope, J. concurring.

Defendant was indicted for and convicted of murder.

1. The first error assigned, is the mode of impanneling the Grand Jury by the Court of Sessions. This was done by special order, made [329]*329by the Court after the offense charged upon the prisoner, and when he was in custody. By sec. 11 of the Act concerning Jurors, (Wood’s Dig. 511) the discretionary power is given to the Judge, in a case like this, to cause an order to be entered upon the minutes of the Court, etc. We see nothing in the facts of this case to distinguish it from that of People v. Rodriguez, 10 Cal. 50; see also, People v. Beatty, 4 Id.

2. There is nothing in the point that a copy of the order was not regularly served on the Sheriff. The object of this provision is that the officer may go on and summon the jury, and if he has done this in the proper mode, the end is answered. Nor is the point well taken, that the Sheriff summoned bystanders, and not men from the body of the county.

We see no error in the record. The judgment is affirmed, and the Court below will fix a day to carry the sentence into execution.

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

Related

Casanova v. Kreusch
21 W. Va. 720 (West Virginia Supreme Court, 1883)
Perry v. Horn
21 W. Va. 732 (West Virginia Supreme Court, 1883)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
15 Cal. 327, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-cuintano-cal-1860.