People v. Lusk

California Court of Appeal

People v. Lusk

204 P. 409, 56 Cal. App. 67, 1922 Cal. App. LEXIS 421

CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal

DecidedJanuary 6, 1922

DocketCrim. No. 583.

StatusPublished

This text of 204 P. 409 (People v. Lusk) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering California Court of Appeal primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

People v. Lusk, 204 P. 409, 56 Cal. App. 67, 1922 Cal. App. LEXIS 421 (Cal. Ct. App. 1922).

Pincite

Opinion

FINCH, P. J.

The defendants appeal from judgments of conviction of the crime of robbery and from orders denying their motions for new trials.

[1] The transcript was filed in this court August 4, 1921. No briefs have been filed in behalf of appellants. The cause was regularly placed on the calendar of January 5, 1922, for oral argument. No appearance was made for either appellant. The appeal is submitted on the record on motion of the respondent without argument. Section 1253 of the Penal Code provides: “The judgment may be affirmed if the appellant fails to appear, but can be reversed only after argument, though the respondent fail to appear.” Under the law “but one disposition can be made of the case in its present condition; it can be affirmed.” (People v. Gehrig, 7 Cal. Unrep. 149 [72 Pac. 717].) A careful examination of the record, however, discloses no prejudicial error in the conduct of the trial, the rulings of the court, or the instructions to the jury. The evidence *68 of the defendants’ guilt is positive and ample to sustain the conviction.

The judgments and orders appealed from are affirmed.

Burnett, J., and Hart, J., concurred. .

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

FINCH, P. J.

The defendants appeal from judgments of conviction of the crime of robbery and from orders denying their motions for new trials.

[1] The transcript was filed in this court August 4, 1921. No briefs have been filed in behalf of appellants. The cause was regularly placed on the calendar of January 5, 1922, for oral argument. No appearance was made for either appellant. The appeal is submitted on the record on motion of the respondent without argument. Section 1253 of the Penal Code provides: “The judgment may be affirmed if the appellant fails to appear, but can be reversed only after argument, though the respondent fail to appear.” Under the law “but one disposition can be made of the case in its present condition; it can be affirmed.” (People v. Gehrig, 7 Cal. Unrep. 149 [72 Pac. 717].) A careful examination of the record, however, discloses no prejudicial error in the conduct of the trial, the rulings of the court, or the instructions to the jury. The evidence *68 of the defendants’ guilt is positive and ample to sustain the conviction.

The judgments and orders appealed from are affirmed.

Burnett, J., and Hart, J., concurred. .

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

204 P. 409, 56 Cal. App. 67, 1922 Cal. App. LEXIS 421, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-lusk-calctapp-1922.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack