People v. Flacco
174 P. 338, 37 Cal. App. 683, 1918 Cal. App. LEXIS 369
Opinion
There has been no appearance in this court for appellant. An examination of the record thoroughly convinces us that he was fairly tried and justly convicted.
The judgment and order are, therefore, affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
People v. Flacco, 174 P. 338, 37 Cal. App. 683, 1918 Cal. App. LEXIS 369 (Cal. Ct. App. 1918).
174 P. 338 (People v. Flacco) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Franchise Tax Board v. Superior Court
252 P.3d 450 (California Supreme Court, 2011)
Sonleitner v. Superior Court
322 P.2d 496 (California Court of Appeal, 1958)
Assets Reconstruction Corp. v. Munson
184 P.2d 11 (California Court of Appeal, 1947)
Mercury Herald Co. v. Moore
138 P.2d 673 (California Supreme Court, 1943)
People v. Hochwender
124 P.2d 823 (California Supreme Court, 1942)
Southern Service Co. v. County of Los Angeles
97 P.2d 963 (California Supreme Court, 1940)
Marculescu v. City Planning Commission
46 P.2d 308 (California Court of Appeal, 1935)
Cooper v. Gibson
24 P.2d 952 (California Court of Appeal, 1933)
Hershey v. Cole
20 P.2d 972 (California Court of Appeal, 1933)
General Engineering & Dry Dock Co. v. East Bay Municipal Utility District
14 P.2d 828 (California Court of Appeal, 1932)
Ryberg v. Lundstrom
261 P. 453 (Utah Supreme Court, 1927)
La Mesa, Lemon Grove & Spring Valley Irrigation District v. Halley
239 P. 719 (California Supreme Court, 1925)
Krohn v. Reclamation District No. 17
174 P. 342 (California Court of Appeal, 1918)