People v. Reed

California Court of Appeal

People v. Reed

56 P.2d 240, 13 Cal. App. 2d 39, 1936 Cal. App. LEXIS 664

CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal

DecidedMarch 31, 1936

DocketCrim. No. 2851

StatusPublished

Cited by5 cases

This text of 56 P.2d 240 (People v. Reed) 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. Reed, 56 P.2d 240, 13 Cal. App. 2d 39, 1936 Cal. App. LEXIS 664 (Cal. Ct. App. 1936).

Pincite

Opinion

CRAIL, P. J.

The defendant was charged under a complaint filed against him in the Municipal Court of the City [40]*40of Los Angeles with a violation of section 17 of the Medical Practice Act, a misdemeanor, and he was convicted thereon. The defendant took an appeal to the appellate department of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County and the judgment of conviction by the municipal court was affirmed. Thereafter the defendant gave notice of appeal to this court and the matter comes before us on the motion of the attorney-general to dismiss the appeal herein on the ground that this court is without jurisdiction to hear or determine the same. This is not a case which was prosecuted by indictment or information, and this court has no jurisdiction of the appeal. (Art. VI, secs. 4-b and 5, Const.; People v. Tossetti, 107 Cal. App. 7 [289 Pac. 881].)

The appeal is dismissed.

Wood, J., and Me Comb, J., pro tem., concurred.

A petition for a rehearing of this cause was denied by the District Court of Appeal on April 10, 1936.

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

CRAIL, P. J.

The defendant was charged under a complaint filed against him in the Municipal Court of the City [40]*40of Los Angeles with a violation of section 17 of the Medical Practice Act, a misdemeanor, and he was convicted thereon. The defendant took an appeal to the appellate department of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County and the judgment of conviction by the municipal court was affirmed. Thereafter the defendant gave notice of appeal to this court and the matter comes before us on the motion of the attorney-general to dismiss the appeal herein on the ground that this court is without jurisdiction to hear or determine the same. This is not a case which was prosecuted by indictment or information, and this court has no jurisdiction of the appeal. (Art. VI, secs. 4-b and 5, Const.; People v. Tossetti, 107 Cal. App. 7 [289 Pac. 881].)

The appeal is dismissed.

Wood, J., and Me Comb, J., pro tem., concurred.

A petition for a rehearing of this cause was denied by the District Court of Appeal on April 10, 1936.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

56 P.2d 240, 13 Cal. App. 2d 39, 1936 Cal. App. LEXIS 664, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-reed-calctapp-1936.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack